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

Re: Action Item: Testable Statement class

From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 12:53:52 +0200
Message-ID: <44C9ECC0.4050005@w3.org>
To: Johannes Koch <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>
Cc: ERT group <public-wai-ert@w3.org>

Ah! *lightbulb*

So an assertion contains exactly one testable, either it is a requirement or a test case. Is this the model you are thinking of?

Best,
  Shadi


Johannes Koch wrote:
> 
> Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
> 
> [TestRequirement and TestCase subclasses of Testable]
> 
>> I still think this is a bad idea, since I don't see the value in 
>> having  the two kinds of subClass. If we adopt this, the range of 
>> earl:requirement  needs to be made earl:Testable too. (Since we are 
>> shifting the range to a  superclass, I think we can get away with that.
> 
> If the object for the earl:testable is either an earl:TestRequirement or 
> an earl:TestCase we can create both assertions about subjects 
> passing/failing/... a certain test case or meeting/not meeting certain 
> requirements.

-- 
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 Friday, 28 July 2006 10:54:01 GMT

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