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

Re: validity levels

From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 12:25:33 +0200
Message-ID: <4537529D.2090601@w3.org>
To: Johannes Koch <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>
Cc: public-wai-ert@w3.org

Johannes Koch wrote:
> 
> Shadi Abou-Zahra schrieb:
>> Beware, some (evaluation) tools misuse their "warning" flags to mean 
>> "conditional pass" (as in "further manual checking needed" or such). 
>> In EARL these should be "cannotTell" (or subclasses thereof).
>>
>> Similarly, many other "warning" should actually be subclasses of 
>> "pass". For example "feature X is valid according to the CSS 
>> specification but not supported by browser Y" is actually a pass.
> 
> Yep, that's what I meant. Should we (evaluation tool creators) subclass 
> these for use in our application? Or do we want to subclass them in EARL?

Maybe the EARL 1.0 Guide can suggest a set of subclassed values?

Regards,
   Shadi


-- 
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, 19 October 2006 10:25:42 GMT

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