Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Reword the abstract #168

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 1, 2018
Merged

Reword the abstract #168

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
3f3f1bf
Reword the abstract
rdeltour Feb 1, 2018
8cfde1a
Re-introduce the name of the spec in the abstract
rdeltour Feb 1, 2018
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion act-rules-format.bs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ Status: ED
Group: act-framework
Editor: Wilco Fiers, Deque Systems
Editor: Maureen Kraft, IBM Corp.
Abstract: The Accessibility Conformance Testing (ACT) Rules Format 1.0 specifies requirements for writing accessibility test rules. This includes test rules that are carried out fully-automatically, semi-automatically, and manually. By defining this common format, organizations are better able to document and share their testing procedures. This enables transparency and harmonization of testing methods, including methods implemented by accessibility test tools.
Abstract: This specification defines a format for writing accessibility test rules. These rules can be carried out fully-automatically, semi-automatically, and manually. This common format allows any party involved in accessibility testing to document and share their testing procedures in a robust and understandable manner. This enables transparency and harmonization of testing methods, including methods implemented by accessibility test tools.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we should keep the first sentence. I get that it's a bit repetative, but it's good to have the name in it.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, what I didn’t like about the first sentence was the "specifies requirements" bit, which feels obvious for a spec ;-) and the fact that the essence of the spec is to define a format so I wanted to make that appear more clearly.

If we keep the name of the spec, it reads "The Accessibility Conformance Testing (ACT) Rules Format 1.0 defines a format for writing accessibility test rules" which is a bit repetitive but OK. Some other W3C specs don’t have the name in the abstract (like for instance HTML), some do (like WCAG).

So your call, boss :-)

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, Shadi suggested we keep it so it can be coppied as a stand-alone text. Can you put in a quick update so I can merge? I want to get a CfC out before the weekend.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure can do. So I’ll keep the spec but keep also the reword in the second part of the sentence? like so:

The Accessibility Conformance Testing (ACT) Rules Format 1.0 defines a format for writing accessibility test rules

Can you confirm?

Markup Shorthands: markdown yes
</pre>

Expand Down