Content-Length: 19062 | pFad | https://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2001/10/eval
Copyright © 2001, 2002 W3C® (MIT, INRIA, Keio), All Rights Reserved. W3C liability, trademark, document use and software licensing rules apply.
This document provides guidance for determining whether a user agent satisfies the requirements of User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG) 1.0 [UAAG10]. User agents include HTML browsers and other types of software that retrieve and render Web content. A user agent that conforms to UAAG 1.0 will promote accessibility through its own user interface and through other internal facilities, including its ability to communicate with other technologies (especially assistive technologies).
This document has been produced as part of work on test suites being done by the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UAWG) Working Group. These are initial notes by the authors; this document does not represent Working Group consensus.
This document is part of a series of accessibility documents published by the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). WAI Accessibility Guidelines are produced as part of the WAI Technical Activity. The goals of the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group are described in the charter.
Section 3 of UAAG 1.0 defines conformance:
A user agent conforms to this document by satisfying the requirements identified by a conformance profile.
Here are the principal steps for evaluating a user agent for conformance:
This document focuses on step four.
The UAWG recommends performing evaluations with the Web-based evaluation tool available from the Working Group's home page..
A well-formed conformance claim must include the title and (dated) URI of UAAG 1.0. For instance:
Note that the URI is the "dated" version, not the "latest version" URI (which is http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG10/).
Section 1.2 of UAAG 1.0 states:
In general, a conforming user agent will consist of several coordinated components, such as a Web browser, a multimedia player, several plug-ins, features or applications provided by the operating environment, and documentation distributed with the software or available on the Web.
Together, these components must satisfy the requirements of a chosen conformance profile. For each component, identify the relevant version information; this will be part of the well-formed claim.
Chapter 3 of UAAG 1.0 explains that a user agent is not required to satisfy every requirement in this document in order to conform. Instead, during the course of an evaluation, you can choose a conformance profile, which identifies the subset of requirements the user agent actually satisfies. Chapter three explains how to choose a conformance profile and the information each profile must include. A conformance profile includes information about:
Chapter three also explains how to determine which checkpoints must be satisfied given a chosen conformance profile.
The UAAG 1.0 checklist organizes the checkpoints by priority, and may be used in this step. For information about calculating which checkpoints must be satisfied to conform, refer to "Notes on discretionary behavior in UAAG 1.0" [UAAG10-DISC].
For each checkpoint in set that results from the previous step, rate how well the user agent satisfies the requirements. Since UAAG 1.0 is neither format-specific nor operating environment specific, it will be necessary to evaluate each checkpoint in the specific context of the chosen user agent.
Please note that some checkpoints include "Normative inclusions and exclusions" that qualify the checkpoint's provisions, and may have an impact on whether the user agent satisfies each provision of the checkpoint.
Where one finds the relevant information depends largely on the nature of the requirement:
The following sections suggest where to find information for each type of checkpoint. See also some detailed information for UAAG 1.0 evaluations.
Relevant content requirements will depend largely on the formats identified in the conformance profile.
Satisfaction of a number of requirements, notably those for user interface features, will be difficult to verify without input from developers. When this is the case, we encourage you to:
When a requirement refers to an external resource:
For some of the checkpoints, a binary rating ("yes" or "no") may be possible, but for others, it is likely that the claimant will need to (or want to) give a more detailed rating to the user agent for each requirement. The User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group's implementation report [REPORT] offers one rating system, but this system is not required, and it may change as the Working Group continues to develop test suites, etc.
In some cases, the checkpoint will be precise enough so that techniques necessary to satisfy the checkpoint are clear . In other cases, the checkpoint will indicate techniques that are sufficient but not necessary to satisfy the checkpoint.
Some suggestions when rating a user agent:
An evaluation tool is available to help you perform an evaluation.
Chapter three discusses requirements for "well-formed claims." The UAWG is currently working on formalisms for making claims and for representing evaluations. Refer to the UAWG's implementation report [REPORT] for more information.
Fetched URL: https://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2001/10/eval
Alternative Proxies: