- From: Gabriele Bartolini <me@gabrielebartolini.it>
- Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 12:22:16 +0100
- To: Johannes Koch <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>,public-wai-ert@w3.org
At 10.00 23/03/2005, Johannes Koch wrote: >Yesterday Gabriele asked me if EARL should only be used for accessibility >test results. I think EARL can be used for other tests, too. What do you think? Sorry, that was not exactly the case. I probably did not explain myself properly, and I apologise for that. :-) I was asking you for some clarification about point # 1 (Evaluating a Web site using tools in different languages), in particular if you were volountarily referring to the 'general' case, and not just 'accessibility', given that point # 5's description specifically deals with accessibility issues (which, IMHO, could be extended to the general case too). I know and believe that EARL must be generic. Mine was just a question. :-) Also, I asked your opinion about site integrity (broken links and the like), particularly if it could fall into point #1 (I reckon it could also fall into use case # 5 if monitored over time): personally, that could be interesting for me as developer of ht://Check. My intention was to provide you with more examples and see if the cases I raised could fit into one or more of the existing categories you have carefully written. I apologise again for not having been clear enough with the private mail. Thank you. Ciao, -Gabriele -- Gabriele Bartolini: Web Programmer, ht://Dig & IWA/HWG Member, ht://Check and ht://Miner maintainer Current Location: Prato, Toscana, Italia me@gabrielebartolini.it | www.gabrielebartolini.it | ICQ#129221447 > "Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate", Dante Alighieri, Divina Commedia, Inferno
Received on Wednesday, 23 March 2005 11:26:40 UTC