W3C

Site Navigation

Nearby

Results of Questionnaire Thorough review and CFC for publication

The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody.

This questionnaire was open from 2018-01-29 to 2018-02-01.

4 answers have been received.

Jump to results for question:

  1. ACT Rules Format 1.0 Working Draft
  2. Sample ACT Rules
  3. ACT Review Process

1. ACT Rules Format 1.0 Working Draft

Please review the current editor's draft of the ACT Rules Format 1.0 (29 Jan) for its readiness for publication for public review. Once our task force approves, we'll take the draft to the AG WG for their approval to publish.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Yes, the draft is ready for publication as-is. 1
Yes, the draft is ready for publication, with the edits/changes proposed in a GitHub issue or in the comments below. 3
No, the draft is not ready for publication for the reasons documented in a GitHub issue or in the comments below.

Details

Responder ACT Rules Format 1.0 Working DraftComments
Wilco Fiers Yes, the draft is ready for publication as-is.
Kasper Isager Dalsgarð Yes, the draft is ready for publication, with the edits/changes proposed in a GitHub issue or in the comments below. We at Siteimprove would like to know what we're going to do in order to get feedback on the editor's note currently present in the "Rule Grouping" section of the current draft (https://w3c.github.io/wcag-act/act-rules-format.html#grouping). We think it's an important point to clarify as we might otherwise encounter rules that we cannot write using the ACT specification (such as rules for SC 2.4.5 Multiple Ways).
Charu Pandhi Yes, the draft is ready for publication, with the edits/changes proposed in a GitHub issue or in the comments below. "An expectation is a statement that must be true about each test target (see Applicability)." Suggest clarifying what we mean by an Expectation by stating, " An expectation is a conformance statement that must be discrete and true about each test target"
Romain Deltour Yes, the draft is ready for publication, with the edits/changes proposed in a GitHub issue or in the comments below. There are still a few sections that lack clarity IMO, for instance:

- the output format section (see issue #162)
- the QA section (see issues #163, #164)
- on rule aggregation (see issue #165)

I don’t think that should prevent us from publishing a new public working draft, but I believe we should at least add notes and ideally pointers to GitHub issues, so that readers are aware when we identified issues already (see #166).

Otherwise, there are a couple editorial low-hanging fruits that we could add if time allows:

#136, #168, #169, #170, #171


I’m so sorry for the late submissions, of for missing yet another call. I don’t want to hinder our publishing of the next draft with this, so feel free to postpone these to the next draft.

2. Sample ACT Rules

Review the changes to the three example rules to reflect the latest ACT Rules Format.

Are the rule changes ready to be merged?

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Yes, the draft changes to the rules are ready to merge as-is. 3
Yes, the draft changes to the rules are ready to merge, with the edits/changes proposed in a GitHub issue or in the comments below. 1
No, the draft changes to the rules are not ready to merge for the reasons documented in a GitHub issue or in the comments below.

Details

Responder Sample ACT RulesComments
Wilco Fiers Yes, the draft changes to the rules are ready to merge as-is.
Kasper Isager Dalsgarð Yes, the draft changes to the rules are ready to merge as-is.
Charu Pandhi Yes, the draft changes to the rules are ready to merge as-is.
Romain Deltour Yes, the draft changes to the rules are ready to merge, with the edits/changes proposed in a GitHub issue or in the comments below. See the reviews on each PRs. Basically:
- proposing to add CSS selectors in the applicability sections
- shouldn’t we add a reference to previous versions of the rules?

3. ACT Review Process

Please review the ACT Review Process for its readiness for publication. Once our task force approves, we'll take the draft to the AG WG for their approval to publish.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Yes, the ACT Review Process is ready for publication as-is. 4
Yes, the ACT Review Process is ready for publication, with the edits/changes proposed in a GitHub issue or in the comments below.
No, the ACT Review Process is not ready for publication for the reasons documented in a GitHub issue or in the comments below.

Details

Responder ACT Review ProcessComments
Wilco Fiers Yes, the ACT Review Process is ready for publication as-is.
Kasper Isager Dalsgarð Yes, the ACT Review Process is ready for publication as-is.
Charu Pandhi Yes, the ACT Review Process is ready for publication as-is.
Romain Deltour Yes, the ACT Review Process is ready for publication as-is.

More details on responses

Non-responders

The following persons have not answered the questionnaire:

  1. Katie Haritos-Shea
  2. David MacDonald
  3. Mary Jo Mueller
  4. Detlev Fischer
  5. Chris Loiselle
  6. Jonathan Avila
  7. Rachael Bradley Montgomery
  8. Charles Adams
  9. Kathy Eng
  10. Daniel Montalvo
  11. Todd Libby
  12. Thomas Brunet
  13. Catherine Droege
  14. Suji Sreerama
  15. Shane Dittmar

Send an email to all the non-responders.

Compact view of the results / list of email addresses of the responders

WBS home / Questionnaires / WG questionnaires / Answer this questionnaire

Report issues on GitHub project w3c/wbs-design or by mail to sysreq.