3.3.8: Redundant entry - session term

[ghost]

This may be semantics. But I am not 100% on the term "session" in 3.3.8: Redundant entry. For example:

This Success Criterion pertains to the current user session, and is not applicable a user returns after closing a session or navigating away.

This Success Criterion does not add a requirement to remember information between sessions, a process is defined on the basis of an activity and does not continue across sessions.

What is a session in this context? For example, if I an on a website a buy something, checkout as a guest and fill out my personal information, complete the purchase, and then go on to buy something else, is that one session?

So in that case, would the website be required to store my personal information somehow? I've not navigated away from the website or close anything.

I would assume that the normative description "For steps in a process..." would allow. And in this example, the process is the checkout flow, so it would not need to carry over into another checkout flow, even if it is done straight after.

It is just the term "session" that is throwing me, that makes it sounds broader than a user journey.

[alastc]

For example, if I an on a website a buy something, checkout as a guest and fill out my personal information, complete the purchase, and then go on to buy something else, is that one session?

It might be, but it would be two processes, so out of scope.

Think of both process & session as scoping, so going outside either means it is not in scope.

[Helixopp]

+1 to Alastairc As far as our intent in drafting this SC are concerned, once the user completed the activity in this example, making the purchase, they would've finished the process/session. Going through the process all over again, to make another purchase, would be a separate, or new, sprocess/ession.

[mbgower]

I agree with @alastc and @Helixopp. I think the Understanding document can address what is meant by process (if it isn't scoped in a definition or already in the Understanding document).
I've made a pull request to better scope the term "session" (which @alastc just mentioned a few minutes ago above), but it does not actually address your question. It clarifies that 3.3.8 does not cover entry between separate sessions.

[Helixopp]

If I remember correctly, Andrew Kirkpatrick brought to our attention during the initial review while I was drafting this SC that process is an already defined term in W3C documentation. This message was Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse any typographic errors. On Nov 24, 2020, at 9:45 AM, Mike Gower <notifications@github.com> wrote:  I think the Understanding document can address what is meant by process (if it isn't scoped in a definition or already in the Understanding document). I've made a pull request to better scope the term "session" (which @alastc<https://github.com/alastc> just mentioned a few minutes ago above), but it does not actually address your question. It clarifies that 3.3.8 does not cover entry between separate sessions. — You are receiving this because you were assigned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#1335 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMKLT7LP4DBGMTD644CK3K3SRPWLZANCNFSM4QHGVQIA>.

[Helixopp]

Websters dictionary defines "process" as:

A systematic series of actions directed to some end.

Continuous action, operation, or series of changes taking place in a definite manner.

In these cases each action would be a step.

Websters Dictionary defines 'session" as:

1. the sitting together of a court, council, legislature, or the like, for conference or the transaction of business:
   Congress is now in session.

2. A single continuous sitting, or period of sitting, of persons so assembled.
   Based on these 2 plain language definitions, a session is a single instance of transacting business. The process is a series of steps, or actions, to complete the transaction (activity).

In my opinion the plain language definitions are sufficient, and it seems that there's an urge to redefine an already sound definition.

I agree with Mike Gower's suggestion above.

[Helixopp]

Draft Response: The ordinary English definitions of "process" and "session" sufficiently articulate that the session, in this case, would be the instance the user convenes to transact the business (make the purchase). The process would be the instance of making that purchase. Once the user completes that transaction that session haas ended. They have achieved the outcome in the process, and concluded their session.

Plain language reading of the ordinary English definitions of "process" and "session" sufficiently address this interpretation.

[alastc]

Hi @Helixopp,

I think in this case the question is really "what does session mean in this context?"

Also, I noticed that we'd managed to put in two separate paragraphs in the intent to cover session, so I combined those to:

This Success Criterion does not add a requirement to remember information between sessions, a process is defined on the basis of an activity and is not applicable when a user returns after closing a session or navigating away.

To explain the session aspect, we could add:

---

For example, purchasing a product might be a process, but there is no requirement to save the information to then complete a separate purchase.

[alastc]

Hi @wardav,

Thanks for you question, we have since updated the SC text to start:

---

Information previously entered by or provided to the user that is required to be entered again in the same process and in the same user session is either:

---

We hope that addresses your question, please re-open if that is not the case.