See also: IRC log
Wilco: 2 pull requests remain
... Proposed wordsmithing from Romain
... Feedback looks good to me
... Romain reworded text of Implementation Validation
MaryJo: Editorial, The last sentence should read, "the expected result"
Wilco: updating pull request
Romain: I didn't know what you meant by list of pointers and then I reread and found definition. Maybe use a cross link here
Wilco: Makes sense. Not sure of common practice. Is this something we should have as definition?
Romain: Yes. This is common practice
Wilco: We don't have a list of definitions
currently
... Have pointer link to selected item section
<rdeltour> clarification: I think bikeshed (the tool used for edting the documet) has facility for definition + cross-ref links, but I don't konw if it's a best practice in WCAG docs
Wilco: Ok, I will make that change.
Romain: We have link to selected item and we should also have a link to the outcome section for consistency
+1
<rdeltour> +1
<shadi> +1
<maryjom> +1
Wilco: Plus one to merge this in.
... RESOLUTION: Proposal accepted
<Wilco> making these rules interchangable, organizations are better document and share their method of testing.
<Wilco> By making these rules interchangable, organizations are better document and share their method of testing.
Wilco: Agrees with Romain's feedback
regarding grammatical updates.
... What should this be? How should this sentence read?
<Wilco> By making these rules interchangable, organizations can better document and share their method of testing.
Wilco: Added the word "can"
... What about interchangeable?
Romain: I think of it as being able to be ingested by different things. I'm not sure interchangeable is correct. Rather a shared or common format.
Wilco: Rules are about setting policy and
one way of doing that. If you want your QA team to manage executability,
automated, semi-automated, manually, if they develop rules they use this
format and another organization can pick it up.
... Can be shared with another organization
Romain: If we think of ruleset for a given tool, the implementation is not interchangeable.
Wilco: Correct but the document is
Moe: How about adoptable?
<Wilco> By adopting a standardized rule description format, organizations are better document and share their method of testing.
The Accessibility Conformance Testing Framework 1.0 (ACT Framework 1.0) is a specification designed to harmonize how accessibility rule are described for automated test tools, and how test procedures are written for quality assurance testing. By making these rules interchangable, organizations are better document and share their method of testing. An interchangable format is the first step in developing a harmonized approach for accessibility conforma[CUT]
Alistair: "defined format" Makes this
easier to harmonize approach
... "By writing these tests in a defined format organizations are better
able to document and share their method of testing"
Wilco: I like it. Works for me.
Moe: Would we drop the last sentence?
Wilco: How about "A standardized format is
the first step in developing a harmonized approach for accessibility
conformance testing."
... Is this too defined of a statement? We are looking for 1 ultimate
test method. Do we need to soften it?
Alistair: As long as you write the tests in
a defined format then okay.
... Enabling is better
<Wilco> The Accessibility Conformance Testing Framework 1.0 (ACT Framework 1.0) is a specification designed to harmonize how accessibility rules are described for automated test tools, and how test procedures are written for quality assurance testing. By writing these tests in a defined format, organizations are better able to document and share their method of testing. A defined format for writing tests is the first step in enabling a harmonized approach for acces[CUT]
<Wilco> conformance testing.
<rdeltour> +1
+1
<maryjom> +1
<agarrison> +1
<shadi> +1
RESOLUTION: Updated Abstract accepted. Will merge.
Alistair: Starting with "Because" is not
good.
... Too many hyphens.
... 6.1.3 Outcome, should have hyphen in cantTell
`cantTell`: It is unclear whether or not the Test Target passes of rails the test
Shadi: This is from earl.
Wilco: Let's use titles instead. Looks nicer.
<Wilco> https://www.w3.org/TR/EARL10-Schema/#terms-instances
Alistair: It's nice to read the document.
... Would be good to see document every time
Romain: Continuous updates
Alistair: How about a retrospective every 3-4 weeks?
MaryJo: This is a good middle ground
Wilco: Clearly something we have to do
right now. Make sure the document fits together.
... Over the next week or so, Moe and I have a lot of work to get this
reading well.
... 6.1 is the only section under 6. Do we drop 6.1?
... Make 6.1 = 6.1, Make 6.1.1 =6.2, Make 6.1.2 = 6.3
Alistair: Makes sense to me.
I will create a draft that includes today's PRs.
Alistair: 5.1 "must be a CSS selector"
sounds too harsh. Could be XPath
... How about? "When it's available, use this syntax..
Wilco: We just need some time to review this.
We can close Issue #53
Close #36
Wilco: Many can be closed. Cleans up
nicely.
... Mary Jo can you review #6, 7 & 8 to see if we have covered
those?
Wilco: Shadi did you send out an email?
Shadi: No, haven't had a chance to call Redfield's yet
Wilco: No meeting next week. Will pick up in 2 weeks
<shadi> trackbot, end meeting