Re: proposed changes to the EARL schema


Nils Ulltveit-Moe wrote:
> Is it decided yet how to deal with tests in different 
> languages or possibly translations? I remember there 
> were some suggestions.

FYI, nothing is decided yet! ;) These are just a capture of what has
been recently discussed to help track the progress in the schema. The
next steps is that we discuss each change one-by-one, then the
participants of the ERT WG get to vote on a decision.

Anyway, to get to your question, yes I skipped that and should add
dc:language to the earl:message property. Doing...

> Would it be an idea with an URI, ID or version tag that 
> could be used to identify each EARL report uniquely? 
> The assessment tool does not have to create that, but 
> it would be nice to have some standardised way of 
> assigning ID's and possibly versions for EARL reports 
> that are collected from tools when the RDF data is 
> going to be stored in a larger triplestore. Another way 
> might be to assign URI's like Annotea does.
> E.g. using <rdf:ID> and <dcterms:hasVersion> 

You get that for free from the uniqueness of URIs. I added rdf:ID to
each earl:assertion so that each assertion is unique *within* a report.
This is in the control of the tool producing the EARL. After that, each
document has a unique URI and the assertion is only a fragment therein.


---                                                    --- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra,    Chair and Team Contact for the ERT WG 
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), 
Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI), 
Evaluation and Repair Tools WG, 
2004, Route des Lucioles - 06560 Sophia-Antipolis - France 
Voice: +33(0)4 92 38 50 64        Fax: +33(0)4 92 38 78 22 

Received on Thursday, 21 April 2005 20:54:10 UTC