W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert@w3.org > April 2007

Re: extending earl:outcome values (Re: comment on section 2.6.1 of EARL Schema)

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 11:27:05 +0000
Message-ID: <4635D271.1020007@hpl.hp.com>
To: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
CC: public-wai-ert@w3.org

Since earl:fail is not a class, it is not possible to subclass it, 
without a significant redesign.

However, one could add OWL axioms like

    restriction( onProperty earl:outome hasValue(my:value) ),
    restriction( onProperty earl:outome hasValue(earl:fail) ) )

I am not convinced that this would be a good move, since it would 
require a greater level of OWL processing than is currently required by 
earl. The current design does allow additional application specific 
information to be included with the earl:Result.


Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote:
> Hi Jeremy,
> Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>> I am using EARL to produce test reports for GRDDL tests.
>> My software being tested occasionally crashes :(
>> I report:
>>    earl:pass and earl:fail as appropriate,
>> and also earl:notApplicable (because some of the GRDDL tests come in 
>> groups which require only one test to be passed)
>> I was thinking that there might be an appropriate code, e.g. 
>> earl:disaster, for reporting that my software crashed during the test.
>> There isn't. And for the purposes of testing, I guess the distinction 
>> between earl:disaster and earl:fail is not important. So, if there was 
>> a useful mechanism for extending earl:fail then I might use it. As is, 
>> EARL allows me to add my own comment (e.g. earl:info) to the 
>> earl:TestResult, so I don't see any need to suggest any other changes.
> Thank you for sharing your experiences with EARL. Please feel free to
> provide a pointer or description to your testing tool/script, we will be
> collecting information about EARL implementations in the next while.
> As to your question regarding extensibility, it should be possible to
> subclass earl:fail for application-specific purposes. However, we also
> received another comment on this part of the spec and will be addressing
> it in our next publication.
> Regards,
>   Shadi

Hewlett-Packard Limited
registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Monday, 30 April 2007 11:42:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:55:55 UTC