RE: more discussion on warnings in EARL

Hi,

> Johannes Koch wrote:
> >> If the document's Internet media type is "text/html". Outcome for 
> >> this atomic test?
> > 
> > PASS, I think.
> 
> PASS and an additional (informative) WARN is issued as well...

Sorry, but I'm still not so sure. Is this the idea?

E.g: [CONTENT_FORMAT_SUPPORT] - [http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-mobileOK-basic10-tests-20061113/#test_content_format_support]

<!-- media type test -->
<earl:TestResult rdf:ID="result1">
  <earl:validity rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/EARL/nmg-strawman#pass"/>
  <dc:title xml:lang="en">Media Type test</dc:title>
  <dc:description rdf:parseType="Literal" xml:lang="en">
    <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
      <p>The media type is text/html</p>
    </div>
  </dc:description>
</earl:TestResult>

... Other atomic tests involved

<!-- CONTENT_FORMAT_SUPPORT test -->
<earl:TestResult rdf:ID="resultN">
  <earl:validity rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/EARL/nmg-strawman#pass"/>
  <dc:title xml:lang="en">Content Format Support</dc:title>
  <dc:description rdf:parseType="Literal" xml:lang="en">
    <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
      <p>The content format support is OK</p>
    </div>
  </dc:description>
  <earl:warning>The media type is text/html (or a more suitable message)</earl:warning>
</earl:TestResult>

And if the media type test is a fail the content format test would be a pass without warnings, isn't it?
If this is the way I think that the pass/fail definition of the media type test is quite strange (almost the opposite of the "expected" behaviour), anyway this would be just a problem of the mobileOK test suite definition.

Regards,
 CI.

 
--------------------------------------

Carlos Iglesias

CTIC Foundation
Science and Technology Park of Gijón
33203 - Gijón, Asturias, Spain 

phone: +34 984291212
fax: +34 984390612
email: carlos.iglesias@fundacionctic.org
URL: http://www.fundacionctic.org

Received on Friday, 15 December 2006 12:54:50 UTC