W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > October 2000

Re: minutes from 30 October 2000

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 12:35:02 -0500 (EST)
To: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
cc: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010301223420.3904-100000@tux.w3.org>
My 2 bits worth on evaluation markup...

Using a known RDF scheme in a seperate document would enable easy sharing of
data beteween tools (since they are sharing the RDF).

Validating can be checked seperate to having a (temporary) tidy-ed version to
use Xpath on.

It would be interesting to talk to Gerald about getting the W3C validator to
produce information in the same RDF scheme.

The problem of things that change is tricky. The best solution I can think of
would be to produce some RDF that says URI-X moved-to URI-Y, where URI-X and
URI-Y are fragment references (and therefore not real URIs <sigh/>) and date
the statement using Dublin Core. You could always make checksums of each
fragment to prove it... (it isn't the implementation that is tricky, it is
the fact that you can end up with a lot of data, although you could quickly
aggregate it and eliminate middle steps...)

In any case it is important for evaluation statements to be dated (or a
checksum provided for slow-but-sure checking).

I think you can actually write Xpointer / Xpath expressions to select bits of
text (I think I saw that it could be used in XSLT). But you should ask an



Charles McCathieNevile    mailto:charles@w3.org    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia
September - November 2000: 
W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Monday, 30 October 2000 12:35:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:31 UTC