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

Re: ERT Action Item: Use Case Scenarios for EARL

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 00:39:53 +1000
To: "Johannes Koch" <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>, public-wai-ert@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.soia0radw5l938@researchsft>

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 19:28:42 +1000, Johannes Koch  
<johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de> wrote:

> So the EARL report has to be created and linked to the logo. It will not
> be a link to some on-the-fly test like with HTML/CSS validation.

This is normal. The statements describing acceptable use of W3C  
conformance logos say, roughly "if you pass the tests, then you canput the  
logo on, and you should link to something that can be used to justify it  
or explain it". (The use of the logos by sites such as CSSZengarden,  
simply as a link where you can check the validity, is therefore IMHO  
formally a breach of copyright since it is an unauthorised use, as well as  
misleading).

In other words, until you have done the CSS or HTML validation and  
generated the report you are explicitly breaching copyright law by using  
those logos too. The fact that someone can check that, by making the logo  
a link, is just an added bonus that the web allows.

So there is no real difference, except that until we have a process that  
allows a complete and correct automatic accessibility evaluation the "on  
the fly" process involves verifying manually derived results as well as  
automatically derived ones. The major difference is in how hard this is to  
do, not the basic process itself. And there is no intrinsic reason why  
your tests need to be manual or automatic based on what the original set  
of tests were - the deciding factor should be the quality of tests  
available to you, to compare to the claimed results.

cheers

Chaals

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile                      Fundacion Sidar
charles@sidar.org   +61 409 134 136    http://www.sidar.org
Received on Thursday, 31 March 2005 14:39:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:25 GMT