W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2006

RE: CONFORMANCE issues & resolutions -- based on new conformance section.

From: Paul Walsh, Segala <paulwalsh@segala.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 14:32:30 -0000
To: "'Shadi Abou-Zahra'" <shadi@w3.org>
Cc: "'Gregg Vanderheiden'" <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20060314143230.C083C5755CCEA@postie1.hosting365.ie>

 For the record,

      Paul Walsh, Segala wrote:
      > I'm interested to hear the groups thoughts on this one 
      - I know Shadi 
      > might have a different opinion :)
      
      Good guess! ;)
      
      Just as background for the WCAG WG: the ERT WG is 
      currently in the process of initiating closer 
      coordination with the "Mobile Web Best Practices Working 
      Group" (MWBP) and the "Content Labeling Incubator Group" 
      (XG CL) to help develop a more robust and complete 
      metadata for conformance claims. EARL and RDF-CL have 
      significant overlap but also interesting differences. We 
      want to align these two vocabularies and get the best of them...

[PW] The Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group (MWBP) is making the
assumption that the output of the "Content Labelling Incubator Group" (XG
CL) will be used for conformance claims. EARL will be referenced for 'test'
material. It's far from a foregone conclusion but these are the assumptions
being made at this time. However, that's not to say that the XG CL won't
incorporate EARL.

So, the question still stands, EARL for recording test documentation for
internal reporting and integration purposes. Content Labels for making WCAG
conformance claims? EARL can be used to demonstrate the tests that were
performed to achieve conformance.
 
Getting interesting :)

Paul
Received on Tuesday, 14 March 2006 14:32:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:45 GMT