Re: RDF syntax variations and EARL test suites

hi Christophe,

These are different serializations of the same report. Any tool parsing 
EARL should be able to read those two "models" (in Jena jargon) and find 
them equivalent. That is why any attempt to treat RDF as XML is damned 
to fail.

I tried to highlight this issue in the Guide.

If you don't configure your tool adequately, for instance in Jena, it 
may be that you become as prefixes j.0, j.1, etc. And being honest, it 
does not matter :-)

On 24/11/11 14:42, Christophe Strobbe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The discussions about using the dc or the dct namespace for Dublin Core
> metadata terms are essentially about syntax. This brings up the
> question: what about bigger variations in syntax?
>
> For example, when I use AccessODF
> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/accessodf/> in OpenOffice.org 3.3 and
> in LibreOffice 3.4.3, the EARL syntax is not the same. The EARL reports
> are saved in RDF files inside the ODF files, so it is possible to
> extract the reports and compare them.
>
> One thing that is striking is that the dct, earl, foaf and doap
> namespace prefixes are nowhere to be seen: you just get ns0, ns1,
> etcetera, accompanied by a namespace declaration as in: <ns0:result
> xmlns:ns0="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#" ...>.
>
> Another striking thing is the difference in syntax between LibreOffice
> and OpenOffice.org. In the RDF from LibreOffice, everything is
> completely flattened, like so:
>
> <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
> <rdf:Description rdf:nodeID="r1r4520r357">
> <ns0:assertedBy xmlns:ns0="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:resource="http://docarch.be/accessibility/ooo/InternalChecker"/>
> </rdf:Description>
> <rdf:Description rdf:nodeID="r1r4520r357">
> <ns0:subject xmlns:ns0="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:nodeID="r1r4520r359"/>
> </rdf:Description>
> <rdf:Description rdf:nodeID="r1r4520r357">
> <ns0:test xmlns:ns0="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:resource="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/checks#E_NoDefaultLanguage"/>
>
> </rdf:Description>
> <rdf:Description rdf:nodeID="r1r4520r357">
> <ns0:result xmlns:ns0="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:nodeID="r1r4520r358"/>
> </rdf:Description>
> <rdf:Description rdf:nodeID="r1r4520r357">
> <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#Assertion"/>
> </rdf:Description>
> <rdf:Description rdf:nodeID="r1r4520r358">
> <ns0:date
> xmlns:ns0="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">2011-11-23T19:23:49+0100</ns0:date>
>
> </rdf:Description>
> (...)
> </rdf:RDF>
>
> In OpenOffice.org, it looks a little bit nicer:
>
> <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
> <ns1:TestCase xmlns:ns1="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:about="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/checks#E_NoDefaultLanguage"/>
>
> <ns2:TestCase xmlns:ns2="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:about="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/checks#A_FormulaWithoutAlt"/>
>
> <ns3:TestCase xmlns:ns3="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:about="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/checks#E_ImageAnchorFloat"/>
>
> <ns4:TestCase xmlns:ns4="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:about="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/checks#E_UnsupportedImageFormat"/>
>
> <ns5:TestCase xmlns:ns5="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:about="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/checks#A_ImageWithoutAlt"/>
>
> <ns6:TestCase xmlns:ns6="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:about="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/checks#A_FakeTable"/>
>
> <ns7:TestCase xmlns:ns7="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:about="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/checks#E_EmptyHeading"/>
>
> <ns8:TestCase xmlns:ns8="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:about="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/checks#A_MergedCells"/>
>
> <ns9:TestCase xmlns:ns9="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:about="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/checks#A_BreakRows"/>
>
> <ns10:TestCase xmlns:ns10="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:about="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/checks#A_FakeHeading"/>
>
> <ns11:TestCase xmlns:ns11="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:about="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/checks#A_NoHyperlinkText"/>
>
> <ns12:TestCase xmlns:ns12="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:about="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/checks#A_JustifiedText"/>
>
> <ns13:Checker xmlns:ns13="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/"
> rdf:about="http://docarch.be/accessibility/ooo/InternalChecker">
> <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#Assertor"/>
> </ns13:Checker>
> <ns14:TestCase xmlns:ns14="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#"
> rdf:about="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/checks#A_SmallText"/>
>
> <ns15:Assertion xmlns:ns15="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#">
> <ns15:assertedBy
> rdf:resource="http://docarch.be/accessibility/ooo/InternalChecker"/>
> <ns15:result>
> <ns15:TestResult>
> <ns16:date
> xmlns:ns16="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">2011-11-24T14:23:11+0100</ns16:date>
>
> <ns15:outcome rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#failed"/>
> </ns15:TestResult>
> </ns15:result>
> <ns15:subject>
> <ns17:Document
> xmlns:ns17="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/types#">
> <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#TestSubject"/>
> </ns17:Document>
> </ns15:subject>
> <ns15:test
> rdf:resource="http://www.docarch.be/accessibility-checker/checks#E_NoDefaultLanguage"/>
>
> </ns15:Assertion>
> (...)
> </rdf:RDF>
>
> We need to be aware of this when thinking about our test suite.
>
> On second thought, I also think this syntax difference provides an
> opportunity for the documentation of implementations: the RDF libraries
> inside LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org provide different outputs
> (syntactically), but appear to be able to read each other's format (as
> they should, anyway). You can test this by checking an ODF document in
> the first office suite, then saving it (to save the EARL report), and
> then opening it in the other office suite, and checking whether
> AccessODF displays the same list of errors and warnings in its UI. I
> have tested this for the first time, and it works. Maybe we can use this
> as evidence for support of both output and input.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Christophe
>
>

-- 
Best Regards, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Saludos,
carlos

Dr Carlos A Velasco
   Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology FIT
   Web Compliance Center: http://webcc.fit.fraunhofer.de/
   imergo®: http://imergo.com/ · http://imergo.de/
   Schloss Birlinghoven, D53757 Sankt Augustin (Germany)
   Tel: +49-2241-142609 · Fax: +49-2241-1442609

Received on Friday, 25 November 2011 07:39:11 UTC