– DRAFT –
Mobile Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

New template for methods

<jeanne> https://github.com/w3c/silver/tree/ACT_Method_proposal/methods/template

on github – individual files

<jeanne> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG3/2020/methods/images-of-text/

Looking at existing technique – Images of text – here's what it looks like today

platform, summary, how it solves the user need. How it solves the user need is the tying in where you are today where you have a great list of user needs for The mobile success criteria for the ones you've targeted to move to WCAG three

that was the first step

today talking about the next step – how do you build the methods for how this can be evaluated

that's where your testing goes

so this is the old model. Platform, technology which most of the time is going to be HTML. We have summary that is a wrap up of what we are trying to do and how itself the User need. The next tab is the description tab which describes the outcome. You don't need to start with it but that is built on the user needs – basically what has to happen in order for that user need to be met.

There's a lot more detail about outcomes coming and there's a different group that's writing a new guidance for how to create outcomes and hopefully will have that for you to look at next week it's not quite ready for this week

so let's hold that for now and start looking at the other parts of this

Jeanne: the next tab is all examples

Jeanne: an image, code, all examples

Jeanne: Final page is resources

<jeanne> https://github.com/w3c/silver/tree/ACT_Method_proposal/methods/template

Jeanne: back to the template

Jeanne: we now have different tabs organized differently – introduction, background, examples, test and glossary

Jeanne: Some information has moved to background

Jeanne: if you look at the index file scroll down to lines 13-17 These are the new tabs

Jeanne: open the introduction tab and you are looking Starting at line 11 you'll have the outcome, which I'm advising you not to try to do this week. I'll be able to talk more about that next week

Jeanne: The platform, technology, input – trying to be more specific. Most of the feedback about testing was we are trying to be to broad we need to get more precision into it. So this is one of the places where we are Looking for more precision. We want to get the technical sources that you would be using for testing which could be the Dom tree, could be accessibility tree or CSS styling

Jeanne: this is something the testers wanted and feel will improve the precision

Jeanne: the summary, how it solves the user need that's where it goes

Jeanne: a new section is when to use this method also includes when not to use this method. Again we have narrowed down some the areas that the testers were concerned about and felt would make it more precise

Jeanne: I can talk about that more when you need it

Jeanne: if you do some work with this template and start running into issues I'd like to bring in the best people to talk about it

Jeanne: so that is the introduction tab. If you go back to the list and github let's take a look at the background tab

Jeanne: This is where we put all the resources, Section on accessibility support, important section on assumptions

Jeanne: assumptions come from ACT rules it's another way of making things more concise

Jeanne: a lot of it is definitions

<jeanne> https://w3c.github.io/wcag-act/act-rules-format.html#assumptions

Jeanne: assumptions are limitations or exceptions for evaluation, test environment,

Jeanne: This is the kind of thing you would put in the assumptions category. Again, it's part of getting it to be more precise for testers. The examples Tab hasn't changed. The test tab has the most changes. Start at line 11 get started information for beginners and testing. Can be a link or text description of how to test it.

Jeanne: what we've done in some of the examples is linked to the easy checks document that has a lot of information for beginners on testing so whenever we can find something that fits in Easy checks we put it there. I think most of your work is pretty technical so doesn't go here. The rest of it is for professionals and is oriented toward them

Jeanne: what's excluded, ignored, what's the elements are. Expectation is this is what we expect to have passed

Jeanne: What's challenging about this new format is it really can't be done by people who don't understand the guideline at a very detailed Level for testing. ACT has agreed to give us help

Jeanne: if you run into trouble writing this. But what it does is allows it to have the precision that testing and tool manufacturers need in order to say that these methods are testable. That was probably the biggest feedback we got from the first public working draft was the ambiguity

Jeanne: it was understandable that the first public working draft was ambiguous because we had put a lot of detailed thought into the guidelines yet – the Actual guidelines Because we were focusing on the overall structure. But people want to know how the guidelines work so that is what we added

Jeanne: another area is the glossary – we can improve precision by getting into the details of how things are defined. We recommend that you use standard definitions were possible and then you can add Additional paragraphs that explain it.

Jeanne: while W3C might have a definition of Pointer events you might want to have a more narrow definition in your method. That's where you can use your glossary to say here's the official definition and in this circumstance we are further narrowing it down to mean this particular example.

Jeanne: so what we've tried to do is give the people who are the technical experts the ability to put in a lot more the technical knowledge that people need to do the testingAnd also the best practice of how to solve the individual User lead.

Jeanne: questions?

Jeanne: so this is only for the method – you can use this github template

Jeanne: will create a Google doc template for this

<jeanne> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZhiMKKnnwleI8emRFElL7SmjBdUABkkI36eZhRMzk-M/

Kim: From that template I'll make method docs for the SCs we have started and put links into the existing documents

Jeanne: this shows the mapping

Jeanne: shows what maps, input aspects for testing is new, Resources changes to background, new sections in background tab. Ignore the code

Jeanne: examples had no change except we were adding subsections – the examples are now sorted by what's a passing example what's a failed example and what's an inapplicable example

Jeanne: test tab we made major changes. We got rid of atomic tests and holistic tests. We don't think were going to be able to do holistic tests. We haven't found any group that's willing to work on it or even thinks it can be done. Were making another approach toward usability testing – more work needs to be done on that. So get started, summary, applicability, and expectation

Jeanne: I put in a link where we are Talking about the definitions to the ACT rules format and you can get a lot of information from that link to that website on the ACT rules. It will be interesting to see if ACT has done rules for pointer events

<jeanne> https://w3c.github.io/wcag-act/act-rules-format.html

Jeanne: link for ACT rules

<jeanne> https://w3c.github.io/wcag-act-rules/

Jeanne: earlier link was rules format – Explanations behind the rules. Second link is the rules themselves

Jeanne: click on all rules and you'll get a list of approved rules and proposed rules

Jeanne: Looking up some keywords – pointer, orientation, label

<jeanne> https://w3c.github.io/wcag-act-rules/standards-guidelines/act/rules/#proposed-test-rules

Getting 404 errors for the ACT rules

Jeanne: checking on that

Next week is joint meeting with COGA

the idea is to inform each other about where our groups might have overlapping interests

Jennifer – feel free to email any thoughts, observations, questions for that meeting if you can't make it

The week after that, November 18, we will get back to the template with Jeanne