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

RE: Compound Locations

From: Carlos Iglesias <carlos.iglesias@fundacionctic.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 16:50:36 +0200
Message-ID: <09700B613C4DD84FA9F2FEA5218828198FB95C@ayalga.fundacionctic.org>
To: <shadi@w3.org>, "Nick Kew" <nick@webthing.com>
Cc: <public-wai-ert@w3.org>

 

Hello all,

Well, I think that probably we'll be able to express some simple cases
but the problems will arrive while trying to express them in an
interoperable way.

For example we can define a range start and a range end but, how are we
going to ensure that all tools will produce the same the same range
start and range end for the same test case?

Maybe it's out of the scope of the group because it could be
responsability of the test metadata, but if we are not able to ensure
this coherence I can just imagine a future plenty of incompabilities
between different tools :O 


>> There are a couple of simple cases we can perhaps express:
>> * Range (Start-point + End-point)
>> * Main+subsidiary locations
>
> Good point. It seems to me that we also need to decide if a 
> single earl:Location instance can describe more than one 
> occurrence of the assertion within the test subject, or if we 
> want to have a 1:1 mapping (1 earl:Location instance 
> corresponds to exactly 1 occurrence). Here is what this 
> proposal could look like in pointy brackets:
> 
> 
> * "Simple" location (e.g. IMG missing ALT attribute)
> 
> <earl:Location>
>   <!--// everything we have to describe the location //-->
>   <earl:XPointer>value</earl:XPointer>
>   <earl:Line>value</earl:Line>
>   ...
> </earl:Location>
> 
> 
> * "Range" location (e.g. group of unseparated links)
> 
> <earl:Location>
>   <earl:LocationRangeStart>
>     <!--// this is itself another instance of location //-->
>     <earl:XPointer>value</earl:XPointer>
>     <earl:Line>value</earl:Line>
>     ...
>   </earl:LocationRangeStart>
>   <earl:LocationRangeEnd>
>     <!--// this is itself another instance of location //-->
>     <earl:XPointer>value</earl:XPointer>
>     <earl:Line>value</earl:Line>
>     ...
>   </earl:LocationRangeEnd>
> </earl:Location>
> 
> 
> * "Shadow" location (e.g. omitted closing tag)
> 
> <earl:Location>
>   <earl:primaryLocation>
>     <!--// this is itself another instance of location //-->
>     <earl:XPointer>value</earl:XPointer>
>     <earl:Line>value</earl:Line>
>     ...
>   </earl:primaryLocation>
>   <earl:secondaryLocation>
>     <!--// this is itself another instance of location //-->
>     <earl:XPointer>value</earl:XPointer>
>     <earl:Line>value</earl:Line>
>     ...
>   </earl:secondaryLocation>
>   <!--// there could be several secondary locations //-->
>   ...
> </earl:Location>
> 
> 
> Are there any other type of relationships that we are forgetting?
> 
> Regards,
>   Shadi
> 
> 
> -- 
> Shadi Abou-Zahra,     Web Accessibility Specialist for Europe 
> Chair and Team 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 Friday, 23 September 2005 14:51:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:26 GMT