[ID] 62 [Status] Closed [Commenter] Samuel Martin [Location] Scope of Applicability [Current text] "Third-party evaluators typically use pure black-box testing and … Therefore it is more difficult, often impossible, to make conformance claims based on such an evaluation alone." [Rationale] First, black-box testing means 'no access to the internals of the software', instead of 'no access to the development environment (and authoring tools)'. Second, in the specific context of website evaluation accessibility, third-party evaluators usually do have access to a large part of the source code (e.g. HTML, CSS, Javascript), which even sometimes represents all the source code (e.g. in static websites, where there is no server-side scripting environment). Thus these tests are rather grey-box (or even white-box). Third, WCAG success criteria are defined from the perspective of the end-user, so black-box testing should not be in principle excluded as a way to test conformance. For instance, the evaluator does not need to know whether device-independent scripting events have been used -i.e. black box-, they just need to check the functionality is available from a keyboard -white box-. [Resolution] Resolution: Change section to read "Third-party evaluators typically have little information about how a website was developed, its internal software, and all its areas and functionality. Therefore it is more difficult, often impossible, to make conformance claims for entire websites based on such an evaluation alone. However, such evaluation can be effective for validating conformance claims and statements about websites." Rationale: Clearer meaning. [Suggested Change] 
-