Talk:SC2-4-5-multiple-ways

Open issues

• Step 4: How is the user supposed to check the links of the site map? Is it clear to users what a 'broken link' is?

Wilco Fiers (talk) 13:47, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

• Step 1: "Examples are main navigation and the breadcrumb trail. Usually found in the header and footer."
  • G125 is very general, but the text indicates internal links.

• Step 4: The test steps in G63 also contains tests, if the sitemap is linked from the pages listed in it as well as if these pages can be reached using other methods of navigation. Applicable? Relevant? Automatable?

• Step 5: "Examples are main navigation and a site map. Usually found in the header and footer."
  • As Kamyar mentioned, this technique applies only to really small sites. On a manual step, the user would have to check all linked pages. If they provide a sub-navigation, not ‘multiple-ways’ value + 1. Should be automatable: Follow links and check linked pages for internal links different to the ones from referencing page.

Frank Berker (talk) 07:38, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

• Step 5: As G126 is only effective for small set of web pages, maybe we should mention in assumptions or find a way to check list all pages on a big site.

--Kamyar Rasta (talk) 13:37, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Ready for review

None.

Closed issues

• Add this test to review category

--Kamyar Rasta (talk) 14:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

• Change "Does the web page provide links to navigate to related web pages" to "Does the web page provide links to the website navigation or other related web page."
• "Usually found in the header and footer." is not a complete sentence. There is no object in the sentence.

Wilco Fiers (talk) 13:47, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

• Step 1: "Examples are main navigation and the breadcrumb trail. Usually found in the header and footer."
• Step 5: "Examples are main navigation and a site map. Usually found in the header and footer."
  • Are these components usually located in header or footer? - Sentence removed.

Frank Berker (talk) 07:38, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

• Step 3: What about checking if the sitemap is a valid sitemap and (maybe) if is it updated as it is mentioned in G63).
• Add/suggest a test name to the test properties

--Kamyar Rasta (talk) 13:37, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

• In Test properties the Test subject are "multiple web pages". In the Selector it is "the entire web page". Wording of SC 2.4.5 could be used: Every "Web page within a set of Web pages" - Decision: Don't change the selector. This test is applied to each page separately.

Frank Berker (talk) 10:45, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

• Assumption: Why is the home page excluded from this test case?
• Step 2: I think the help text "Usally found in the header." is too restrictive.
• Step 1: Do we need to add an explanation that "related web pages" referes to pages belonging to the same web site?
• Sitemap is mentioned in both step 1 and 3. Sitemaps shouldn't be counted twice. Suggest to remove sitemap from step 1.

--Annika Nietzio (talk) 13:56, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

• Step 2: Typo in Help text: If the web page provide[s]

Frank Berker (talk) 10:45, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

• Include main navigation and breadcrumb trail in the text of step 1.
• Change the order from most common to least common solutions to reduce the number of questions: G125, G161, G63, G126. (and obviously renumber them)
• Change 'menu' to 'main navigation'. I think this is a more common term.

Wilco Fiers (talk) 13:34, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

• I'm not sure I understand how step 1, 2 and 3 are supposed to work, please add clarification. - Removed the automatic steps due to complexity of the steps.

Wilco Fiers (talk) 13:08, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

• Added automatic check for G126 (steps 1 to 3). - Removed the automatic steps due to complexity of the steps.

Twan van Houtum (talk) 13:39, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

• Step 5: I don't think a link to the home page should count as multiple-ways += 1.

Annika Nietzio (talk) 14:14, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

• As the test requires no prior knowledge for the user, a description of "site map" can be be helpful.

--Kamyar Rasta (talk) 14:00, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

• Removed step G64 (Table of contents)

Twan van Houtum (talk) 13:00, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

• The "If false" statements seem redundant. I think we can just take those out
• You're missing a step for G125

Wilco Fiers (talk) 13:27, 16 April 2015 (UTC)