- From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 09:25:10 +0100
- To: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
- Cc: Yeliz Yesilada <yesilady@cs.man.ac.uk>, public-mobileok-checker@w3.org, Kentarou Fukuda <KENTAROU@jp.ibm.com>, Yeliz Yesilada <yeliz.yesilada@manchester.ac.uk>
Le jeudi 12 février 2009 à 18:43 +0100, Francois Daoust a écrit : > 3/ I think there is a useful distinction to be made between a subtest > that can't be run because some data is missing, and a subtest that can't > be run because it doesn't need to, i.e. if there are no objects in the > page, the OBJECT_OR_SCRIPTS subtests de facto pass. The first > possibility is what we're talking about. The second possibility may be > of some use in the future (I'm not suggesting we implement it right > now). In short, I would rather keep NOT_APPLICABLE to the second case, > and use DATA_MISSING (I can't think of a better proposal, but the idea > is to point out that the moki representation is incomplete) for checks > on files. FWIW, EARL [1] has "Cannot Tell" that I think could be used for cases like this; it would probably be worth using that term in this context. 1. http://www.w3.org/TR/EARL10//#outcomevalue Dom
Received on Friday, 13 February 2009 08:26:10 UTC