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

Re: test subject is a local file

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 16:20:59 -0500
To: "Carlos Iglesias" <carlos.iglesias@fundacionctic.org>, "Shadi Abou-Zahra" <shadi@w3.org>, public-wai-ert@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.tgw1k9ytwxe0ny@widsith.local>

On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 20:00:48 -0500, Carlos Iglesias  
<carlos.iglesias@fundacionctic.org> wrote:


>> A. Use the existing WebContent class even though this is not  
>> information on the Web.

>> B. Develop a new FileContent class that contains optional properties to  
>> record...

>> C. Use the filename as the URI of a TestSubject class

>> What do people think of these proposals? Are there other proposals?

I think that the best approach is to extend the WebContent class, so that  
it can record content that is not available on the Web such as files. It  
should then be capable of giving all the information you want - but you  
will need something to note that it is not generally available. I think  
the identifier for such a file *should* still be an http: URI (or a URN,  
but I think that is a vastly inferior option) to allow for recording  
relevant information in more than one place, since file: URIs are valid  
identifiers but likely to be really bad at providing uniqueness, and since  
you may not want to reveal the filepath of the document for many good  
reasons)

Which is a m ix of options A and B. I think C is a bad idea.

The alternative would be to use something like FRBR or Dublin Core in a  
more extensive way to identify the resource.

Cheers

Chaals

-- 
   Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
   hablo español  -  je parle français  -  jeg lærer norsk
chaals@opera.com          Try Opera 9 now! http://opera.com
Received on Wednesday, 4 October 2006 21:21:20 GMT

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