W3C

Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group Teleconference

26 Feb 2014

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Shadi, Carlos, Emmanuelle, Samuel
Regrets
Christophe
Chair
Shadi
Scribe
Shadi

Contents


http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-EM/

http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2011/eval/f2f_CSUN

http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/WD-AERT/ED-AERT

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2014Feb/0007.html

can people hear me?

hello?

i can hear you carlos

[[WCAG 2.0 are mentioned twice as the scope of accessibility evaluation.

However, later we say evaluation tools are a broader concept (which may

include any quality assurance tool).]]

Proposal: This document lists _Accessibility Features_ that any _Evaluation Tool_ (including quality assurance tools) can incorporate, so that it supports _Accessibility Evaluation_

<samuelm> Proposal: _Accessibility Evaluation Features_ that any Evaluation tool (including...)

+1 to samuel

<egyrs> +1 too

Carlos: context is Web

Proposal: This document describes _Web Accessibility Evaluation Features_ that any _Web Evaluation Tool_ (including web quality assurance tools) can incorporate, so that they support _Web Accessibility Evaluation_

<samuelm> +1

[[WCAG 2.0 are mentioned twice as the scope of accessibility evaluation.

However, later we say evaluation tools are a broader concept (which may

include any quality assurance tool).]]

[[In the context of this document, an evaluation tool is a software application that enables its users to test web content against specific quality assurance criteria ... The accessibility evaluation features listed and described in this document can be incorporated by evaluation tools to provide support for accessibility evaluation.]]

Samuel: want to be more clear that evaluation tools can sometimes assess more than only accessibility criteria, but that it this document we are only focusing on functionality to help assess accessibility criteria

[[It seems all resources are retrieved via http, but they can e.g. be

retrieved from the local file system during development process.]]

Samuel: maybe CMS that somehow sends content to the evaluation tool, not necessarily through HTTP

[[Tools that evaluate such applications should emulate and record different user actions (e.g., activating interface components by clicking with the mouse or swiping with the fingers on a touch-screen) that modify the status of the current page or load new resources.]]

Proposal: Evaluation tools can handle cookies according to different settings, to emulate different interactions with the server.

[[Guidance on the development of web accessibility evaluation tools]]

Guidance

web accessibility evaluation tools

evaluation tools

accessibility evaluation features

WCAG 2.0 evaluation

tools development

developer guidance

Shadi: can also work with main and sub-title

http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/

<samuelm> Proposal: features of web accessibility evaluation tools // guidance for developers

How to Meet WCAG 2.0

- A customizable quick reference to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 requirements (success criteria) and techniques

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.138 (CVS log)
$Date: 2014/03/06 08:50:33 $