- From: Michael A Squillace <masquill@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 10:07:43 -0500
- To: public-wai-ert@w3.org, accessibility@openajax.org, sfoltz1@gmail.com, jongund@illinois.edu
- Cc: jbrewer@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OFE83F2A19.5BDA2890-ON85257666.0050D27F-86257666.00532B0B@us.ibm.com>
ERT WG: As you know, I co-chair the Open Ajax Alliance Accessibility Tools Task Force (http://www.openajax.org/member/wiki/Accessibility) along with Rich Schwerdtfeger. Besides the goal of publishing a set of standardized, machine-readable validation rules that embody the success criteria of WCAG2 and that are readily-consumable by all tool venders, we have the mission of developing reporting best practices for generating such validation reports based on the execution of these rules against web content and dynamic web applications. In such a report, we would certainly want to include the tool that executed the validation rules, the test subject (i.e. the web content or application being tested), the test criteria, and, most importantly, the test result, which would include the outcome of the execution of a given rule along with information about how to locate offending parts of the content or application. As you know, this is even more problematic for dynamic content in which there is no way to specify detailed information about offending structures without reproducing the HTTP exchanges that led to the violation. Needless to say, this is precisely the type of information that the EARL vocabulary was meant to represent. The problem we have is that producing RDF documents is a tedious task in the context of a browser environment and in JavaScript, the primary language of the OAA task force. Indeed, consuming RDF is tedious as well and, when we began to construct our validation rules for validating WAI-ARIA-related roles and properties, we represented the semantics of WAI-ARIA (which is currently modeled in RDF) in JSON. I have attached that file for your convenience (with the extension changed so as not to have it deleted by email systems or applications). We would like to know whether or not the ERT WG would be open to permitting the serialization of EARL reports in JSON (and possibly other formats), leaving the RDF as the modeling mechanism for the vocabulary. We believe that many more accessibility tool venders would be open to the utility of EARL if reports were generated in this format and that reports would be more readily consumable by applications wishing to permit alternative presentations and aggregations of reports. Please let us know your thoughts and if you think this is a feasible approach. (See attached file: aria_definitions.js.txt) --> Mike Squillace IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center W:512.286.8694 M:512.970.0066 External: http://www.ibm.com/able Internal: http://w3.ibm.com/able
Attachments
- application/octet-stream attachment: aria_definitions.js.txt
Received on Friday, 6 November 2009 15:08:39 UTC