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

Re: Assessments for XAG in EARL

From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 01:54:44 +0100
Message-ID: <011e01c1505d$1a7154a0$55d993c3@y0r1d9>
To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org>, "WAI ER group" <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Assessments for XAG in EARL

Kick-ass work, Chaals!

> Well, assuming my syntax came out correctly [...]

99% fine. The bookmarklet code needs updating (shhhhh! don't tell anyone).

> It seems from teh Schema that there are other results -
> notApplicable is one I would have liked, but didn't
> know how to use.

earl:validity rdfs:range earl:ValidityState;
   rdfs:domain earl:ResultProperty . [...]
earl:NotApplicable a earl:ValidityState .
]]] - http://www.w3.org/2001/03/earl/0.95#

So for example:-

   _:x a earl:ResultProperty; earl:validity earl:NotApplicable .

However, I've grown out of favour of customized result property crap, and I
think that I have a better way of modelling it: it'll just have to wait for
EARL 0.96/0.97/1.0/+. We're already one step ahead of ourselves on most
EARL things... I really think that we should take a shot at a "definitive,
hey it's done" 1.0 version. We released 0.9 on the proviso that it would be
just a demo for the language, and although 0.95 made a couple of
improvements, it was much the same thing.

> I actually find it easier to work in XML syntax. Really.

A handful of people do (DanBri, Chris, you).

> It would be nice to have either examples in XML syntax,
> or get a conversion tool to make some for us.


> There are a fairly restricted range of earl: things - spec isn't
> in them. Do we want to keep the others in earl?

Yes. There are quite a few things that I'd like to add to either EARL 0.95
(we can add things), or EARL 1.0.

> I would still like to use dublin core [...]

No you wouldn't! You think you would, but really you wouldn't. Once you
start prefix/alias creep, you can't get rid of it...

Using Dublin Core in EARL is IMO precisely useless, and even if it were
useful, any tools that recognized it should be clever enough to go get the
EARL schema, search for property documentation, and find out that it's a
subPropertyOf some Dublin Core term.

So, even TimBL says to use other people's data... he didn't say where.
Putting it in the schema is neater than putting it in the instance, where
here we have a highly scoped application. If EARL were a patchwork of
several hundred existing schemata, there wouldn't be a problem... but as it
is, I think that the language is compact enough that it would be more of a
burden than a benefit to use terms external to the EARL namespace.

> for the creator of the statement, be it a person, a tool, or
> a flash of inspiration in the form of a small talking bird...

It's fine if people create terms for small talking birds, however :-)

Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
:Sean :hasHomepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .
Received on Monday, 8 October 2001 20:56:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:33 UTC