W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert-tsdtf@w3.org > August 2006

Re: New TCDL draft - Re: TSD TF: Agenda for 22 August 2006

From: Evangelos Vlachogiannis <evlach@aegean.gr>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 10:48:43 +0300
Message-ID: <44F6945B.2070601@aegean.gr>
To: public-wai-ert-tsdtf@w3.org

Hi Christophe,

Christophe Strobbe wrote:
> Hi Vangelis,
> At 14:07 29/08/2006, Evangelos Vlachogiannis wrote:
>> Hi Christophe, all,
>> Some more minor comments:The source Element Type:
>> In case we use an example from WCAG techniques for instance, 
>> should/how we refer?
> "source" is strictly speaking only intended for borrowed test 
> files/samples, and I have until now assumed that they have a URI/URL of 
> their own instead of being embedded in another document like the WCAG 
> techniques.
> At first sight, the examples in the techniques document have an id (in 
> the H5 element above each example), so we can create URLs these 
> examples. But to support references to them from the source element, I 
> would need to rename an element (sourceFile) and make the testSuite 
> element optional.
> Any thoughts or comments?
This sounds me reasonable. Alternatively we could have RefContext (ex. 
Techniques for WCAG 2.0 - http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/) and 
RefResource (ex. Combining adjacent image and text links for the same 
resource - http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/#H2) elements instead of 
TestSuite and sourceFile respectively.
>> The technicalSpec Element Type
>> ".. element for each file format used by the test case". Maybe need to 
>> clarify: what about inline css? consider replace with something like 
>> "technology used"
> OK, I have changed this in the document. I'll post a new version later 
> this week.
>> The disabilities Element Type
>> I was wondering if we could use a more generic term like "UserProfile" 
>> so that TCDL could met more generic scope.
> Hmm, yes, but then we need to define this UserProfile from scratch and 
> we would like to start creating test samples as soon as possible.
I had in mind something like:

But, sure I agree, time is a big issue here.

Best regards,
Received on Thursday, 31 August 2006 07:48:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:05:59 UTC