Re: result type="foo", confidence, ...

Hi,

Frankly, I see havoc and confusion upon thy users. :)

We are talking about cascades of test cases, assertors, and possibly subjects too. Complex but useful. However, several results? Which one should a tool that is processing tools pick?

It seems to me that it may be a better approach to rework the model for deriving/communicating the confidence level and keep one unambiguous result per assertion.

Cheers,
  Shadi


-----Original Message-----
From: public-wai-ert-request@w3.org On Behalf Of Charles McCathieNevile
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 16:34
To: public-wai-ert@w3.org
Subject: result type="foo", confidence, ...



Hi folks,

in the current EARL spec there are results which look like the following:

<earl:result rdf:parseType="Resource">
   <earl:validity rdf:resource="&earl;fail"/>
   <earl:confidence rdf:resource="&earl;high"/>
   <earl:message>malformed element in line 23</earl:message>
</earl:result>

This makes it possible to put two result on the same Assertion - for  
example to assert that they have a different probability, or the assertor  
has a different level of conidence in them.

<earl:result rdf:parseType="Resource">
   <earl:validity rdf:resource="&earl;notApplicable"/>
   <earl:confidence rdf:resource="&earl;low"/>
   <earl:message>malformed element in line 23</earl:message>
</earl:result>

I am not sure if we want to maintain this possibility, but it provides a  
feasible explanation of what I was copying when I wrote up my examples for  
"EARL by example" [1], and it is how Hera currently produces EARL.

Any thoughts?

cheers

Chaals

[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/talks/200311-earl/all

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile                      Fundacion Sidar
charles@sidar.org   +61 409 134 136    http://www.sidar.org

Received on Wednesday, 13 April 2005 15:36:43 UTC