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

Re: EARL Vocabulary (Retrospecticus)

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 22:13:38 -0500
Message-Id: <200102150306.WAA1055737@smtp1.mail.iamworld.net>
To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>, <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
Cc: "Leonard R. Kasday" <kasday@acm.org>
At 01:31 AM 2001-02-15 +0000, Sean B. Palmer wrote:
>[Long, but useful... another vocabulary update]
>> earl:confidence a rdf:property;
>This is interesting... can we assume that for all assertions made so far,
>the earl:confidence is set to "100%"? Are there any examples where you can
>"half trust a tool" or "trust what someone says to 20%?". I doubt that
>there are any examples with such a fine granularity: usually, you either
>trust something or you don't. One vote for deprecation then. :-)

AG:: and one vote against.

I have come across many places where I would like to apply a percentage rating
to statements such as A covers the information content of B (70%).  Another
place that such weight factors are critical is in rating the autonomy of a
sub-tree in a document.  They vary all over the place but are rarely purely
independent of the context or indistinguishable from the context.

>     earl:shouldExist

AG:: There are lots of other "should's."  Like "shouldComplyWith That's a
standard way to turn a reference into the techniques literature into a repair
hint.  Also the weaker (PL/1 typing) 'resembles' as opposed to the stricter
'conformsTo'.  So we could say shouldResemble <exampleRef>.

There are '.is' '?does' and '!should' mood options for about any
assertion-expression.  The '.is' flavor is the usually-elided default
declaration [of fact].  The '?does' flavor is how one encodes what should be
asked of the human in the loop.

>     earl:quality
>     earl:suggestedReplacement
>Next, we have the classes. I can't think of anymore, but we really need
>quite a few so that people can make ontological extensions (as per some of
>the examples I gave in the last vocabulary discussion [2]):-
>     [Core Classes Module]
>     earl:Level
>     earl:ValidityObject
>For those still seeking an explanation of classes and modularization: a
>class is like something that you can say "x is a y", where y is a class. So
>a "dog" is a type of "animal", and an "animal" is a class in this example.
>Therfore, if you are making your own EARL based langauge, it is useful to
>say that this is a type of EARL something, where that EARL something is a
>class. The more classes we have, the more new properties (and perhaps even
>subClasses) people can define.
>That's it. If you got to here without falling asleep or skipping anything,
>give yourself a pat on the back.

The piece of the action that I am not seeing described here is at a more
primitive level.

In the broader WAI context I think we need to be making assertions to the
effect that "Object X works in audio" or "Composite Y works without audio" or
"teaching module Z is complete in text (97%)" etc.  [Pattern drill: substitute
any media descriptor from HTML4/CSS2 + 'text' in the above where it says
'audio' or 'text']  These are the basic compatibility assertions that we need
to know about building blocks and aggregates of web content.  These plus
equivalence assertions superimposed are about what we need to characterize the
resource pool from which a multimedia [SMIL] presentation is built.  This is
the declarative language generalizing or relaxing the prescriptions encoded in
SMIL test variables.  Is EARL going to be a home for that vocabulary?  I guess
I need to find out if IMS has already done this.

We should have the language to say "this audible description (which coexists
peacefully with the soundtrack) gets you roughly 35% of what we could have
you with full-time commentary on the activity in the associated video" even if
we don't have the nerve to make that sort of assertion in public often.


>Kindest Regards,
>Sean B. Palmer
>@prefix : <<http://webns.net/roughterms/>http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
>[ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] :hasHomepage
<<http://infomesh.net/sbp/>http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .
Received on Wednesday, 14 February 2001 21:59:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:10:38 GMT