- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 13:24:25 -0400
- To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>, <dd@w3.org>, "Leonard R. Kasday" <kasday@acm.org>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
The reason I like 'reporting' is that sharing the state of [both incomplete and completed] evaluations and/or fixes between different centers of activity is where EARL can be recognized to be adding value. It's good if the name reminds us of the answer to "why bother?" Al At 05:54 PM 2001-04-25 +0100, Sean B. Palmer wrote: >> If someone can think of some meaningless thing for R to stand >> for that would be OK with me. > >How about "Resource"... they put that in RDF, and it seems to mean >absolutely nothing as far as I can tell [1] :-) > >> Having said all that, if the consensus of others is to make it >> Evaluation and Report Language, I'll go along with it. > >We could always change it back again, I suppose. I still prefer >"Repair" for the reasons you have given, but it has to be admitted >that there isn't much in the way of "Repair" terms in the EARL 0.9 >model... Daniel says in the original prose that repair information >could be associated by linking to a repair block from a certain >evaluation statement. I'm not quite sure how that will fit into 0.9, >but this is something that we can discuss - certainly, the language is >extensible enough to cope with just about anything; I made several >thousand versions over the weekend, and it was very simple to make the >changes (if it wasn't for the SVG diagram). > >[1] There are many arguements on RDF IG about the nature of >resources... > >-- >Kindest Regards, >Sean B. Palmer >@prefix : <<http://webns.net/roughterms/>http://webns.net/roughterms/> . >:Sean :hasHomepage <<http://purl.org/net/sbp/>http://purl.org/net/sbp/> . >
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2001 13:20:46 UTC