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

Re: updated "usage document", please review

From: cstrobbe <Christophe.Strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 21:20:14 +0100
Message-ID: <1163103614.45538d7e5508a@webmail2.kuleuven.be>
To: public-wai-ert-tsdtf@w3.org

Hi Shadi, TF members,

Quoting Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>:
> Ref: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tests/usingTCDL>
> The "usage document" has been updated to reflect the change requests
> received on the previous version. Besides an editorial revision of
> the 
> document, there has been one significant change regarding the
> directory 
> structure. This and several more questions are outlined below for
> your 
> consideration during the review of this current version of the
> document:
> - The "testfiles" has been renamed to "content" and the "resources" 
> sub-directory has been collapsed. To me it now seems clearer and
> easier to overview. Is this acceptable to the group?

I think it's OK; the different file types are still in different 
directories, which makes it easier to classify them for MIME types on 
certain server (e.g. Apache) as discussed during the conference call on 
5 September.

> - The listing of elements in the section "Metadata Vocabulary"
> should be exhaustive for WCAG 2.0 Test Samples. 
> Are any elements missing?

In 'rules', there is a 'rule' element for each SC; 'locations', 
'techniques' and 'techComment' are chile elements of 'rule' (singular 

> - There is still an open question on how the TCDL 2.0 model
> will look like with respect to 
> the occurrence of "location" and "technique" 
> elements. See relevant thread on this subject:
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2006Oct/

Since we never reached a conclusion, I left the "techniques" where they 
were origally proposed, namely after "locations" (which is also 
reflected in the "usage document"), and I removed them from inside 
It's a clean design, but if we should decide to map test cases to 
techniques/failure through the "rule" element, the "techniques" element 
becomes redundant.

> - It is still open whether TCDL 2.0 will reuse the "HTTP
> Vocabulary in RDF" and the "EARL Location Pointers".
> Both these have been highlighted as notes in the usage document.

Ah, it seems I updated the wrong copy of the "TCDL 2.0 Specification 
and Guide".
Since last week, I have XML Schemas for the HTTP requests from "HTTP 
Vocabulary in RDF" [1] and for "EARL location pointers" [2], but the 
Specification and Guide is not fully up to date.
In the next version, the document will say:
Note: the current location pointers (line, column, xpath) in the 
location element type may eventually be replaced with the location 
pointers from EARL. (See also EARL Pointers in the mailing list archive 
of the TSD TF.) When EARL reaches W3C recommendation status, the 
current location pointers may be deprecated in favour of EARL Pointers.
I know this doesn't sound very strong. Any comments?

The section on "The httpRequest Element Type" will be rewritten to 
reflect the change in the schema.

> - Are there other resources that we should be listing here?

The lists looks good to me.

[1] http://bentoweb.org/refs/schemas/http.xsd, which uses 

[2] http://bentoweb.org/refs/schemas/earlwd.xsd

Best regards,


Christophe Strobbe
K.U.Leuven - Departement of Electrical Engineering - Research Group on 
Document Architectures
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 - 3001 Leuven-Heverlee - BELGIUM
tel: +32 16 32 85 51

Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
Received on Thursday, 9 November 2006 20:20:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:06:00 UTC