WCAG 2.0 Evaluation Methodology Task Force Teleconference

04 Jul 2013

See also: IRC log


Shadi, Martijn, Eric, Vivienne, Detlev
Liz, Kathy, Mike, Peter, Sarah, Tim, Alistair, Kostas


EV: Still working on new editor draft and updated disposition of comments
... tried to answer comments we already discussed

EV: maybe we can split up the work, searching for things we already discussed

VC: will you add the comments received from Giorgio Brajnik

EV: yes, new version is done and will be up shortly

VC: where are we with the 3 questionaires?
... Will anybody go to TPAC?

SAZ: most participants are from EU/US, assumed not a quorum because it is in China

I will not be at TPAC

SAZ: this time no questionnaire on TPAC, because past experiences learn us people probably will not travel that far

EV: worked some feedback from questionnaires into new ED, other feedback is not yet processed
... still waiting for results from website 3, proposal to postpone filling q3, use this site for a different testing track

VC: I send around a sample to the list

EV: do you agree to postpone using website three for now, and use it later?

VC: agrees

<Detlev> Fine with me


<Vivienne> The sample was sent by email previously Martijn

VC: see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-evaltf/2013Jun/0012.html

EV: need to discus use case and ramdom sample size

DF: the change from goals oriented to use cases is high impact, we need to go through the entire document and ask the group for permission

SAZ: seems a conceptuel change, we need to get the terms everybody is using clear

EV: maybe put in wbs (survey)

SAZ: we should end up with 3 or 4 typical types of evaluation
... types could be separated based on an evaluators point of view
... focus on the evaluating procedure

VC: use case: test, remediation, re-test (for example in accreditation scheme)
... use case: test the testers

EV: i will put this in the survey

DF: testing edge cases (most complex pages) is a common use case for us
... if the aim is fixing complex situations, the aim is not the same as in conformance evaluation

<ericvelleman> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-evaltf/2013May/0046.html>

EV: postpone random sample size discussion to when we're with more people

<ericvelleman> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-evaltf/2013Jul/0002.html

VC: what is the status on the 'random discussion'

SAZ: sent an e-mail: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-evaltf/2013Jul/0002.html

EV: in the new DoC there are suggestions on sampling

DF: random sampling is useful, we need to include it

EV: we have to keep it, the question is on how to sample, how much pages, etc

<Detlev> :-)

http://xkcd.com/221/ :-)

<Detlev> good one :-)))

SAZ: we need to supply the algorithm to choose randomly

DF: is there a holiday schedule?

SAZ: hope we can break if we have a next publication

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.138 (CVS log)
$Date: 2013/07/15 06:22:42 $