- From: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:38:42 +0000 (GMT)
- To: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
- cc: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Wendy A Chisholm wrote: Some comments ahead of our IRC chat. > The first EARL 1.0 Working Draft was published > today. http://www.w3.org/TR/EARL10/ > > Please read and comment on the various "Editor's notes" throughout the draft. It seems most of the editors notes deal with "should we explain something that EARL depends on or reference an external resource?" IMO where there's an existing stable resource we should not in general be reproducing it. > 1. severity > Not incorporated into the schema but used as an example extension. Hmmm, I'm not using it myself (yet), but I thought there was a good case for including it. > 2. repairInfo, expectedResult, suspectAgainst. > Did not have support. Nothing added to the schema. No, but a generic "note" property could serve for such things. > 4. testmode > Had support and was included as a class, a property, and instances of the > property. But should be a property of Assertor, not Assertion! > 9. Uniquely identifying pieces of content. OPEN ISSUE. Add a "representation" property to TestSubject, that can be used to describe processing/derivation - e.g. a pointer or checksum. What goes into the "representation" will be an extension (unless we want to predefine simple things like Line/Column or XPath/XPointer). Final comment: A quick-reference list of EARL vocabulary would be more useful than anything. Could perhaps be one of those Appendices that appear to be missing between A and D:-) -- Nick Kew
Received on Wednesday, 11 December 2002 13:01:22 UTC