TOPIC1: Test Writing

Valerie: We ca talk more about itereation of the test.

1.Discuss the presentation of the test 2.Talking about contribution of test 3.Update on JF's work, asking for review for menubar command

Matt: I thought most of what Yohta mentioned was clear. I'll talk with Valerie this afternoon and might come up with some clarification.

<spectranaut> https://github.com/w3c/aria-at/wiki/How-to-contribute-tests

I saw Jon's email this morning, and just wrote wiki page in response to that.

Valerie: This starts with high-level description of goal of the test.
... I'd like to have people's feedback on clarity on this.
... I've writeten this from the extraporation of menubar and checkbox test Matt's made.
... I think the next step is write test cases for next week.

Matt: I think I can write some test case on Friday this week.
... Ways users interact with widget is, where we want to mark down in short list.
... What I'm imagining is we're gonna write test, and then we gonna re-write test and update the test... and so on.

Valerie: Do we wanna discuss further on this right now, since you've already spent some time on this?

Matt: I can edit this wiki as I write test.

Valerie: It would be great if you go through and correct some terminology.

Matt: There are some rare situations where we expect something to happen, that is not necessary related to direct responses to user's action. We'll get to those.

<Jean-Francois_Hector> Everyone, I've just managed to join BlueJeans. Internet is pretty poor where I am today. I've phoned in and my line is good. So I'm available for the 3rd agenda item.

Matt: There are mostly object to interact with. Users always has some goal.
... In the language we're using now, test is not a single assertion.

Valerie: Whole test is interaction now. Assumption is user do something and there's some response.

Matt: When mean in response to which command?

Valerie: Yes, right.

Matt: For third question (When exactly should that information be communciated), I guess when is a bit more general. But the fact that it depends users taking action may affect.
... If tester don't know what information SR to be announced, there are some room for testers to interpret the speech.

Valerie: A lot of questions and concerns should be answered in [How to contribute tests] section.
... A lot of questions and concerns Yohta brought up would be answered in [How to contribute tests] section.

Matt: Annoucement means SR announce some specific information, while communicated woudl be disabled/dimmed.
... State should be conveyed, such as checked or not checked.
... There are some cases 'not checked' is implied through the announcement without announcing 'not checked'.
... This is where SR knowledge comes in.
... We don't wanna say statement is announced. So I agree with the current distinction of annoucned and communcated.
... Bottom line is to help people undertand the language correctly.

Valerie: I'm not sure if there's any use cases for SR to say specific information.

Matt: We're being more specific saying something is announced. That is much more clear language.

Michael: You could still consistently say 'conveyed' but you could alter afterward.

Matt: I prefer the beauty of shorter words, especially in those test cases.

Michael: I'm looking forwad to seeing test cases created.
... Excited about progress making.
... One outstanding question is that how we approach testing. The end goal is to display test result.

I'm curious how we take test result and display in APG architecture.

Valerie: I think eventually this runner will part in APG, and we'll have results of these test in example widget pages.

Michael: Can you also look up value? Is there any easy way to look up them?

Matt: No. We didn't get that far yet.

Valerie: Do you think you could write test combobox on Friday?

Matt: I think I can do that, though I'm not sure Jon would be able to work on.
... So for the first question (hat are the ways user will interact with widget?) I think there might be more longer list of answers than we had anticipated.
... There might be some suggested list of words, such as collapsed, type...

JF: Does merging testing command blocking you?

Valerie: Not for now, but this helps moving on to next step for menubar.

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154  of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Present: Matt_King spectranaut shimizuyohta michael_fairchild Jean-Francois_Hector
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: shimizuyohta
Inferring Scribes: shimizuyohta

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.


WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth


WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report


WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)