[ID] 66 [Status] Closed [Commenter] Loïc Martínez Normand [Location] Step 4a [Suggested Change] "I would like to have guidance outlining a process such as: a) Look for failures (as published) b) If no failures are found, check if any SC fails c) If no SC fails and a "in-depth analysis" has been selected in step 1.b, then determines which techniques have been used to conform to each SC" [Resolution] Resolution: Section rewritten. Rationale: Provides more guidance on how to evaluate content using WCAG 2.0 and its accompanying document. [Rationale] 
"I find that this step has gaps in the content I expected it to have. In my opinion checking for the 5 conformance requirements is not a straightforward task and more guidance is needed." " My proposed process is based on the definition of "satisfies a SC" in WCAG: "the success criterion does not evaluate to 'false'", Given that definition, it is not really needed to find/determine the techniques. It should be enough to be sure that no SC fails." "All the text about scenarios, use cases, personas and user involvement is, to me, out of scope when dealing about testing for conformance with a standard. These type of things are essential during the development process when following a user-centred approach, but I believe that they don't provide added value in the context of checking the conformance of WCAG 2.0. If this text about scenarios and users is to be kept, I'd suggest it being transformed into a note."