W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert@w3.org > March 2005

Re: Requirement? An "evidence" property

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:56:10 +1000
To: shadi@w3.org
Cc: public-wai-ert@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.sogg3wogw5l938@researchsft>

There are several reasons why I think that the evidence structure should  
be attached to the Assertion, not associated with the test done, nor the  
subject of the test.

The strongest one for me is the fact that there are different ways of  
making the decision - if I have a different set of rules for deciding  
whether to go out on Saturday, I can provide them seperately, or I can  
just state the atomic result without justification (which is what I  
usually do when I am going out on Saturday night :-)

The structure I proposed is designed to allow for an Assertion to include  
a reference to the decision making process used (Karl's, or my rules, in  
the example), and each item that was used in making the decision.

Nothing stops you from making a bare assertion (say, conformance to WCAG  
double-A) without evidence. Many sites already do this. The point is to  
provide, for cases where it is helpful, a way of tracking back to the  
evidence. A use case is a site that has a monitoring program, and actually  
wants tocheck where its problems with reaching a particular profile of  
conformance are occurring.



On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 21:40:02 +1100, Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org> wrote:

> However, I'm not entirely convinced it should be in something like the  
> evidence structure
> you are proposing but rather within the Subject which we are testing.  
> What I mean is some
> way to say the result is for one atomic test (i.e. "Test 2") or for a  
> statement ("go out
> on sunday") which is actually an aggregation of tests (Tests 1+2+3).

Charles McCathieNevile                      Fundacion Sidar
charles@sidar.org   +61 409 134 136    http://www.sidar.org
Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2005 14:56:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:55:52 UTC