- From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 12:25:33 +0200
- To: Johannes Koch <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>
- Cc: public-wai-ert@w3.org
Johannes Koch wrote: > > Shadi Abou-Zahra schrieb: >> Beware, some (evaluation) tools misuse their "warning" flags to mean >> "conditional pass" (as in "further manual checking needed" or such). >> In EARL these should be "cannotTell" (or subclasses thereof). >> >> Similarly, many other "warning" should actually be subclasses of >> "pass". For example "feature X is valid according to the CSS >> specification but not supported by browser Y" is actually a pass. > > Yep, that's what I meant. Should we (evaluation tool creators) subclass > these for use in our application? Or do we want to subclass them in EARL? Maybe the EARL 1.0 Guide can suggest a set of subclassed values? Regards, Shadi -- Shadi Abou-Zahra Web Accessibility Specialist for Europe | Chair & Staff Contact for the Evaluation and Repair Tools WG | World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) http://www.w3.org/ | Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI), http://www.w3.org/WAI/ | WAI-TIES Project, http://www.w3.org/WAI/TIES/ | Evaluation and Repair Tools WG, http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/ | 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, 19 October 2006 10:25:42 UTC