- From: Carlos A Velasco <Carlos.Velasco@fit.fraunhofer.de>
- Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 08:59:00 +0100
- To: shadi@w3.org
- Cc: Nils Ulltveit-Moe <nils@u-moe.no>, public-wai-ert@w3.org
Hi Shadi, Nils, Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote: > > Hi Nils, > > This is indeed a use case. However, the issue with this is that it > generates huge reports. Basically a full copy of all the tested > resources (+ some EARL metadata that may become negligible with this > amount of data). It depends on the functionality of the tool. For QA scenarios, there is no other choice than storing the rendered content, to keep history of changes. > Thus, most evaluation tools will probably omit recording the actual HTTP > content (payload). I imagine tools may become "intelligent" and only use > the earl:WebContent class when specific HTTP parameters are essential to > describe the tested resources (for example, on a site that can be > personalized or uses sessions). But this is a different discussion... ;) Like I said, it depends on what the tools is designed for. regards, carlos -- Dr Carlos A Velasco - http://access.fit.fraunhofer.de/ Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte Informationstechnik FIT [Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology (FIT)] Barrierefreie Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologie für Alle Schloss Birlinghoven, D53757 Sankt Augustin (Germany) Tel: +49-2241-142609 Fax: +49-2241-1442609
Received on Friday, 17 February 2006 07:59:10 UTC