W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > April 2001

Re: EARL Announcement

From: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:20:27 +0200
Message-Id: <200104242020.f3OKKRh07986@zidane.inria.fr>
To: "Leonard R. Kasday" <kasday@acm.org>
cc: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org

For a simple alt, the repair info may well be included in the
evaluator comments (at the semantics level at least), but for
something more complex, there's a need for additional

Take the case of a page that uses FONT, COLOR, EARL would have a
note to the effect of saying: use CSS instead, but the real repair is
a complete mapping (xslt is one option) of FONT, COLOR to css

In short, I think repair needs more support at the rdf level (like
other application domains), and earl should go out without it to serve
more groups.

> At 03:51 PM 4/24/01 +0200, Daniel Dardailler wrote:
> >there's no repair information ("how to repair it") in the core
> >vocabulary we put together so far
> Hmmm.  What sort of information would be "how to repair" it.   For example, 
> if the ALT text of an image is "horse" and EARL specifies that the ALT text 
> should be "cow", you're saying that's not "repair information".  What would 
> have to be added to make it "repair" information?
> Len
> --
> Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D.
> Institute on Disabilities/UAP and Dept. of Electrical Engineering at Temple 
> University
> (215) 204-2247 (voice)                 (800) 750-7428 (TTY)
> http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday         mailto:kasday@acm.org
> Chair, W3C Web Accessibility Initiative Evaluation and Repair Tools Group
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/
> The WAVE web page accessibility evaluation assistant: 
> http://www.temple.edu/inst_disabilities/piat/wave/
Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2001 16:20:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:32 UTC