Other comments on EARL 1.0 Schema (editor's draft)

Dear ERT WG,

Below are a few non-editorial comments on EARL 1.0 Schema (editor's draft
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/EARL10/WD-EARL10-Schema-20090908>).

1.1 Audience
"The assumed audience of this specification is developers who are
implementing EARL in software or processes..." -> I would expect the
audience to be evaluation tool developers and developers of tools that
support manual and semi-automated evaluation. The current wording seems
somewhat circular (as if you were saying that the audience of WCAG is only
developers implementing WCAG, when you really want to all web developers to
implement it).


2.2 Assertor class
Example 6: Bob using Cool Tool
The tool is identified by means of foaf:member: <foaf:member
rdf:resource="http://www.example.org/tool/#cool"/>
but foaf:member <http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_member> does not seem to
cover software. Could earl:Software be used here instead?


2.3. TestSubject Class
How should EARL implementors identify a document that is not available on
the internet? foaf:document does not seem to have an ID-like property. Some
document formats, e.g. DAISY, get an automatically generated ID when they
are created, but others, e.g. the OpenDocument Format, don't have an ID. In
ODF, it is possible to embed the EARL document in the ODF/ZIP format. Can
this method be used instead of an ID?


2.4. TestCriterion Class
The examples in this section rely on publicly available criteria. What if
you use criteria that are only available inside an organisation and that
are not necessarily retrievable through HTTP?


Best regards,

Christophe

-- 
Christophe Strobbe
K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD
Research Group on Document Architectures
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442
B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee
BELGIUM
tel: +32 16 32 85 51 
www.docarch.be
Twitter: @RabelaisA11y

Received on Friday, 8 April 2011 14:04:27 UTC