W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > April 2004

RE: EARL Testcase

From: Lisa Seeman <lisa@ubaccess.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 06:07:31 +0300
To: 'Shadi Abou-Zahra' <shadi@w3.org>, 'WAI ER IG List' <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
Message-id: <001301c424f2$4a4cf6e0$340aa8c0@patirsrv.patir.com>


I am wondering if we can not use RDF ID for binding


I was dealing with something somewhat similar with mapping XFORMS
interactivity with an inaccessible script

I needed to bind statements that bind statements that bind variables
with  statements that bind scripts, so I am playing with saying
something like...

<rdf:description about = "form@name=form1" ub:hasNonscriptEquivalent =
"xform@model=form1">

<rdf:li ub:IncludeDataBind ="rdfID_1"> 

<rdf:li ub:IncludeDataBind ="rdfID_2"> 

</rdf:description> 

Does that make some sense?


All the best
Lisa Seeman
 
Visit us at the UB Access website
UB Access - Moving internet accessibility
 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-er-ig-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:w3c-wai-er-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Shadi Abou-Zahra
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 9:46 PM
> To: 'Chris Ridpath'; 'WAI ER IG List'
> Subject: RE: EARL Testcase
> 
> 
> 
> agreed.
> 
> i've also been playing around with this type of code:
> 
> 
> <earl:Assertion 
> rdf:about="http://vendor-a.org/tool/tests/#check-for-alt">
>   <earl:subject rdf:resource="#subject"/>
>   <earl:result rdf:parseType="Resource">
>     <earl:validity 
> rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/EARL/nmg-strawman#pass"/>
>     <earl:confidence 
> rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/EARL/nmg-strawman#low"/>
>     <earl:message>ALT Tags Exist</earl:message>
>   </earl:result>
>   <earl:mode 
> rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/EARL/nmg-strawman#automatic"/> 
>   <earl:testcase 
> rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/#tech-text-equivalent"/>
>   <earl:assertedBy rdf:resource="#assertor"/>
> </earl:Assertion>
> 
> 
> ...which makes aggregation very comfortable but kind of turns 
> EARL inside out (as i understand the current spec).
> 
> to me it makes sense as an assertion is really about the 
> specific test which the tool conducts, the earl:testcase 
> should be optional if this test really maps to a test suite. 
> comments welcome...
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Ridpath [mailto:chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca] 
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 20:36
> To: Shadi Abou-Zahra; 'WAI ER IG List'
> Subject: Re: EARL Testcase
> 
> 
> Works for me.
> 
> Although I'm not sure about the use of the "rdf:about" and 
> "rdf:resource" attributes. Should these both be 
> "rdf:resource" attributes?
> 
> Charles - Any comments?
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Shadi Abou-Zahra" <shadi@w3.org>
> To: "'Chris Ridpath'" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>; "'WAI ER 
> IG List'" <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 2:15 PM
> Subject: RE: EARL Testcase
> 
> 
> >
> > hi,
> >
> > currently i'm just using this hack for my prototype:
> >
> >
> > <earl:testcase 
> > rdf:about="http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/#tech-text-equivalent">
> >   <earl:testId 
> > rdf:resource="http://vendor-a.org/tool/tests/#check-for-alt" /> 
> > </earl:testcase>
> >
> >
> > regards,
> >   shadi
> >
> 
Received on Saturday, 17 April 2004 23:07:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:10:42 GMT