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

Re: Linking 'location' and 'technique': models and examples

From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2006 13:49:10 +0100
Message-ID: <45756AC6.2040307@w3.org>
To: cstrobbe <Christophe.Strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>
Cc: public-wai-ert-tsdtf@w3.org

Hi,

cstrobbe wrote:
> That's actually option B ;-)

As CarlosI already pointed out, I mixed up options A and B for B and C 
respectively. Apologies for the confusion.


> I assume this actually refers to option C ("techniques" element inside 
> the "location" element). The repetition of the technique for each 
> location is a clear downside. On the other hand, as Carlos Velasco 
> pointed out, we could require that test samples are "atomic" in the 
> sense that each sample contains only one occurrence of the failure or 
> technique, hence avoiding repetition of the technique.

So if we would adopt option B, each test sample would have exactly one 
occurrence of the location element and the metadata would look something 
like this:

<locations>
   <location>
     <technique ... />
     <earl:xPointer ... />
     <earl:htmlPointer ... />
     <!-- more earl pointers -->
     ...
   </location>
</locations>

Is that what you mean?


> Any other thoughts on this?

Can you give an example of option A just to compare?


Regards,
   Shadi


-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra     Web Accessibility Specialist for Europe |
Chair & Staff Contact for the Evaluation and Repair Tools WG |
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)           http://www.w3.org/ |
Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI),   http://www.w3.org/WAI/ |
WAI-TIES Project,                http://www.w3.org/WAI/TIES/ |
Evaluation and Repair Tools WG,    http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/ |
2004, Route des Lucioles - 06560,  Sophia-Antipolis - France |
Voice: +33(0)4 92 38 50 64          Fax: +33(0)4 92 38 78 22 |
Received on Tuesday, 5 December 2006 12:49:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:34 GMT