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

[resolved] Earl validity - alternative terminology

From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 12:39:50 +0100
Message-ID: <458A7286.6040904@w3.org>
To: public-wai-ert@w3.org

Dear Group,

During the previous teleconference meeting we brainstormed further 
option and came up with the following alternatives:

     7. value
     8. label
     9. output
    10. rating

However, we decided that earl:outcome was still the best option and 
decided to adopt it unless someone comes up with a better suggestion. If 
you have concerns about the new term earl:outcome, then please send a 
rationale and alternate suggestions to the ERT list by 10 January 2007.

Regards,
   Shadi


David Rooks wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> As per my action item, i have been looking at alternatives to 
> earl:validity and have come up with (IMO) 2 good options...
> 
>    1. executionResult
>    2. outcome
> 
> A few other options which i don't think are quite as good are...
> 
>    3. conclusion
>    4. analysis
>    5. assessment
>    6. evaluation
> 
> My personal preference is option 2.
> 
> Regards,
> David
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra     Web Accessibility Specialist for Europe |
Chair & Staff 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 Thursday, 21 December 2006 11:40:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:27 GMT