- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@miscoranda.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 23:05:09 +0100
- To: public-earl10-comments@w3.org
This is feedback on a Last Call Working Draft: Developer Guide for Evaluation and Report Language (EARL) 1.0 W3C Working Draft 10 May 2011 http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-EARL10-Guide-20110510/ The section in question here is § 4.1 Conforming EARL 1.0 Reports: http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-EARL10-Guide-20110510/#EARL10Reports This bug assumes that my suggestion in Bug 002 will be implemented, and the section moved to the EARL 1.0 Schema specification. The data in § 4.1 is only presently available, as far as I know, in English. This is as though the HTML 4.01 DTD were to have been written in English, instead of as an SGML DTD. An appropriate language for this would be OWL, and that data should go in the normative EARL schema here: http://www.w3.org/ns/earl It should also be repeated in the EARL 1.0 Schema specification, first in terms of the OWL constructs, and then in general terms which closely mirror the existing English. Rationale: This data should be machine readable so that conformance checkers can be more easily implemented. It may even be possible, for example, to use off the shelf OWL conformance checkers rather than having to build your own specific EARL conformance checkers, or at least to integrate the former in the latter. Moreover, when conformance criteria are expressed in a machine readable way, they can be more easily tested. Bugs may more easily become apparent. When this section is moved per Bug 002, then, it should be expanded to include OWL or other appropriate vocabulary data to describe the constraints, and a modified English section to explain the specialised schema vocabulary. This should be accompanied by changes in the actual RDF/XML schema available by dereferencing the EARL namespace. -- Sean B. Palmer, http://inamidst.com/sbp/
Received on Tuesday, 10 May 2011 22:05:37 UTC