- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:44:10 +1000
- To: "Nils Ulltveit-Moe" <nils@u-moe.no>
- Cc: "Chris Ridpath" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>, public-wai-ert@w3.org
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 05:01:03 +1000, Nils Ulltveit-Moe <nils@u-moe.no> wrote: > Hi Charles, > > tir, 12,.04.2005 kl. 03.20 +1000, skrev Charles McCathieNevile: >> However a tool might want to note that it is using a different tool for >> something - e.g. the W3C code validators. I am not sure of this - the >> normal idea would be to simply have the W3C validator itself make the >> particular relevant assertion. > > We dealing with a case with several tools inside another tool for large > scale assessments and scalability. E.g. one big observatory using > several free and commercial tools to perform large scale assessments, > and store the results in a repository for further data mining. Also the > case of performing some WCAG tests with one tool and other using other > tools to use best tool available for the job. > > It would be nice if the EARL model worked for a hierarchy of tools. Well the simple approach would be to have several Assertors, and each one assert the things that they have tested. Where you have multiple tools doing sub-testa, and then derive the results from a collection of sub-tests, it is important to be able to refer back to them, I think. But the proposed evidence property would work for that, if you don't include al the Assertions. Anyway, we are looking to implement that now in Hera, so I will send an example of how we propose to do it. cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile Fundacion Sidar charles@sidar.org +61 409 134 136 http://www.sidar.org
Received on Monday, 11 April 2005 23:44:41 UTC