- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 18:28:45 +0100
- To: "Alex Rousskov" <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
- Cc: <www-qa@w3.org>
> This is exactly the path I am afraid of: > [...] > 5. W3C decides guidelines are ignored because it is difficult > to express and test them and because many developers > interpret them differently > 6. We need EARL! Actually, AFAICT EARL was created due to a recognized need in the Web Accessibility community for a language which is easy to merge and analyse, not because people are not expressing test conformance claims in some machine readable language. For example, the GL Working Group have long running disputes about what Web Content passes certain WAI guideline checkpoints, and which don't. A machine readable amalgamation of the results would be cool for obvious reasons. I agree that the path that you have outlined is something to be extremely wary of, but I hope that EARL did not arise as a link in that particular chain. Cheers, -- Kindest Regards, Sean B. Palmer @prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> . :Sean :hasHomepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2001 13:48:27 UTC