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

Re: Location of 'techniques' in TCDL

From: cstrobbe <Christophe.Strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 12:17:39 +0200
Message-ID: <1161253059.453750c389b6a@webmail2.kuleuven.be>
To: public-wai-ert-tsdtf@w3.org

Hi,

Quoting Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>:
> Hi,
> 
> cstrobbe wrote:
> > If we turn around our approach and map primarily to
> > techniques/failures instead of success criteria, 
> > do we also need to revisit the naming
> > convention? The resulting test suite would be very useful for
> > developers looking for examples of techniques/failures, 
> > but as a benchmark for ERT, wouldn't it suffer from the lack
> > of a mapping to success criteria?
> 
> 
> Just for the sake of completeness, the tests would still map to 
> the success criteria via the techniques. Anyway, thanks for 
> explaining the TCDL approach.

> >>> if we care about the relationship between technique(s) and 
> >>> location(s), why not put 'techniques' inside 'location'; if we
> >>> don't care, why not put 'techniques' outside 'locations' and  
> >>> avoid suggesting a  relationship between a specific location 
> >>> and a specific technique? Let's take a clear stance, not 
> >>> something in between.
> >> 
> >> Agreed. I for my part care... ;)
> > 
> > Great. 
> > Any other comments?
> 
> Yes. If the sample is a good implementation of the technique, the 
> location element becomes meaning less.

In the schema, each of the types of location pointers is optional, but 
the TCDL spec and/or our usage document could say that at least one is 
required. After all, if you implement a technique, there is something 
in the code to prove it. 
That said, you seem to present an argument against putting 'techniques' 
inside 'location'. Does that mean you prefer putting it after 
'locations'?

Are Shadi and I the only ones who care about this?

Best regards,

Christophe


-- 
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
http://www.docarch.be/ 

Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
Received on Thursday, 19 October 2006 10:19:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:33 GMT