- From: Daniela Ortner <Daniela.Ortner@jku.at>
- Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 11:12:23 +0200
- To: <public-wai-ert-tsdtf@w3.org>
Hi Christophe, you wrote that with the first option ('techniques' in 'locations' after 'location') we would be able to describe how a location and a certain technique relate. The current schema would allow the following: <locations> <location> </location> <location> </location> ... <technique> </technique> <technique> </technique> ... </locations> But what does that indicate? That the first <location> belongs to the first <technique>? I see no possibility to express relationship between a location and a technique from this example. Wouldn't it be better to construct something like: <locations> <location> <technique> </technique> <technique> </technique> ... </location> <location> <technique> </technique> <technique> </technique> ... </location> ... </locations> Looking forward to read your thoughts on that... Regards, Daniela >>> cstrobbe <Christophe.Strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be> 17.10.2006 18:30:03 >>> Hi, While cleaning up the last issues in TCDL, I noticed a curious bug/ feature in the schema: 'techniques' can be added * either in 'locations' (after 'location', which is the first child element of 'locations'), * or in 'rule', after 'locations'. The second option is what I originally proposed [1], but the first option would allow us to describe more accurately how a 'location' and certain 'techniques' relate, especially if a test case uses several techniques in different locations. The latter may not be a use case in this task force, but it would be interesting for BenToWeb or other test suite efforts. Are there any objections to removing 'techniques' from 'rule' and allowing it only in 'locations'? Best regards, Christophe [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2006Sep/ 0019.html -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Departement of Electrical Engineering - Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 - 3001 Leuven-Heverlee - BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
Received on Wednesday, 18 October 2006 09:12:51 UTC