Updated framework requirements #1
Conversation
|
|
||
| ### 2.3 Ensure Consistency | ||
|
|
||
| The ACT Framework has to ensure that ACT Rules can be implemented in a way that provides consistent results. An ACT Rule must include a way to test the implementation of that rule. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What do you mean by "include a way to test the implementation"?
Also, I wouldn't use must, which makes it sound like we're speccing rules already.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In 2.3, I would use the word "produces" rather than "provides".
| The ACT Framework has to ensure that ACT Rules can be implemented in a way that provides consistent results. An ACT Rule must include a way to test the implementation of that rule. | ||
|
|
||
| ### 2.4 Ensure Measurable Accuracy | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
measurable sounds confusing to me (maybe it's just me, as a non-native speaker), as it can have both a strict meaning (evaluate a quantity/size/amount, with units) or a laxer one (assess the importance/value).
I'm not sure the prose below clarifies that (to be discussed).
|
|
||
| ### 2.6 Existing Rulesets can be Transformed to ACT Rules | ||
|
|
||
| The ACT Framework must ensure that existing rulesets can be updated to meet the ACT Framework. Existing work in this field should be the bases for the ACT Framework to ease the adoption. At least one ruleset must be adopted to the ACT Framework during the development process. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
At least one ruleset must be adopted
Is it the Rec track requirement? Sounds more like a process req than a req on the framework itself.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
'bases' should be 'basis'
I'm confused by the last statement, "At least one ruleset must be adopted to the ACT Framework during the development process." If the ACT framework is to be a Recommendation, doesn't it require two implementations?
| 1. Introduction | ||
| --------------- | ||
|
|
||
| There are many accessibility test tools (ATTs). These can be fully automatic, or can prompt a user for specific actions, in order to discover accessibility issues of some digital product. Each of these tools will run one, or a serie of tests to come to some result. These test procedures may be designed to look for violations of WCAG 2.0, or some other accessibility standard, and for some that are highly customizable they can even be used in testing an organization's own accessibility policy. The test procedures used by ATT are often called 'rules'. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The application scope of ACT is mentioned here ("WCAG 2.0, or some other accessibility standard"), but not in requirements.
If possible, there should be a requirement about this IMO, to refine which kind of technologies can be tested by an ACT rule.
| 1. Introduction | ||
| --------------- | ||
|
|
||
| There are many accessibility test tools (ATTs). These can be fully automatic, or can prompt a user for specific actions, in order to discover accessibility issues of some digital product. Each of these tools will run one, or a serie of tests to come to some result. These test procedures may be designed to look for violations of WCAG 2.0, or some other accessibility standard, and for some that are highly customizable they can even be used in testing an organization's own accessibility policy. The test procedures used by ATT are often called 'rules'. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"series" is misspelled above as "serie"
|
|
||
| The ACT Framework is developed by the [ACT Taskforce](https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/conformance-testing/), lead by the [WCAG Working Group](https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/). The ACT Framework will standardize those aspects all rules have in common that ensure them to be reliable, implementable by different ATTs and transparent for the users of this tool. By standardizing this, the ACT Taskforce aims to promote a common understanding of how accessibility can be tested for certain technologies. | ||
|
|
||
| Development and implementation of ACT Rules are outside the scope of the ACT Framework. This work is currently done within the [Auto-WCAG Community Group](https://www.w3.org/community/auto-wcag/). The ACT Taskforce support the Auto-WCAG Community group in the development of the first set of ACT Rules. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Editorial: Last sentence should say "supports" or "will support"
| @@ -26,13 +26,12 @@ Simply put, the ACT Framework is a standard on how to write test rules. Rules wr | |||
|
|
|||
| ### 2.1 Ensure Readability | |||
|
|
|||
| ACT Rules have different audiences. These include the developer of test tools, QA testers who may have to run through the rules manually or with the aid of a tool, as well as accessibility experts who should understand what the tools they use can do, so that they can be informed on where a tool might not test, and where potential false positives might occur. | |||
| The ACT Framework should ensure that the rules are readable by both tool developers and less-technical users. For instance, the ACT Framework may discourage the use of pseudo code in favor of plain English. | |||
|
|
|||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like the changes. In particular, removing this section, "-Because ACT Rules both a technical and non-technical audience, the ACT Framework should work out a balance between the two. ..."
| 1. Introduction | ||
| --------------- | ||
|
|
||
| There are many accessibility test tools (ATTs). These can be fully automatic, or can prompt a user for specific actions, in order to discover accessibility issues of some digital product. Each of these tools will run one, or a serie of tests to come to some result. These test procedures may be designed to look for violations of WCAG 2.0, or some other accessibility standard, and for some that are highly customizable they can even be used in testing an organization's own accessibility policy. The test procedures used by ATT are often called 'rules'. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sorry for picking on minor thing. "These can be fully automatic, or can prompt a user for specific actions, in order to discover accessibility issues of some digital product." Do we need "fully" for this? Actually is there anything fully automatic testing?
How we deal with acronym in the spec such as ATT? Some other w3c doc I have seen has a link to the terminology including the definition.
# Conflicts: # ACT-reqs.html
Updating local fork and branch with master
No description provided.