[Accessibility-testing] Defining our list of a11y tests

[Austin Seraphin]

Yes it does. After our last discussion I started really loving the idea
of using Cloak of Darkness, since its very nature forces visual
description. I don't know about ASCII art though! But it would keep
things simple.


On 03/08/2018 02:29 PM, Jason McIntosh wrote:
> Refreshing the question I ended my overlong email from last week on:
>
>> Our next set of tasks as a group involves creating those friendly Twine, Inform, and ChoiceScript games that exercise both WCAG-based and IF-specific accessibility challenges. Creating these games carries the sub-task of deciding and documenting what challenges they should and can contain. Does that sound about right?
> I still seek confirmation that I’m barking up the right tree here. :) This is a modification of the documentation-first path that Dan had suggested last year, and — I freely admit — reflects my own bias towards building a working model first, and then retrospectively documenting what you did and how it works.
>
> More on how my thoughts here run: I would propose that we form sub-groups who would each create a small testing game for one of the IF platforms we’d like to test. (I7, Twine 1/2, ChoiceScript). It would be up to each such group to have their test-game exercise as much of WCAG level A as they can, with a focus on IF-specific challenges. (So: ASCII art in a parser game, cycle-links in a Twine game, et cetera.)
>
> These sub-groups could feel free to recruit volunteers from outside the formal membership of this committee, if they so desire.
>
> Does this make sense? 🌳🐕
> _______________________________________________
> Accessibility-testing mailing list
> Accessibility-testing at iftechfoundation.org
> http://iftechfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-testing

-- 
Austin Seraphin: https://AustinSeraphin.com