- From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 13:38:47 -0000
- To: "Nadia Heninger" <nadia@barbwired.com>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
"Nadia Heninger" > >Now, how do you expect to query it to check whether the page has been > >fixed, given that the URIs representing the resources are the same? > >It's broken. The rule is: one URI, one resource. [People get votes, > >URIs get resources!] > > I still don't think I understand. What's supposed to be available in the > bit in my namespace? The test report? I've never had this clear myself, but I think of it more as just a name, or pointer that refers to the report, that's unique. So it's nothing more than a unique handle. > If two different people complete the same test suite and come up with > conflicting results that look like the example above, how is having > http://myns#(thing tested)+(date) labeled as the WebContent in question any > more helpful when the same information is stored elsewhere in the report? If you put a combined report through the RDF-validator, you'll see the problem I believe. > Is the "thing" the EARL report? I believe so. >I'd rather save information in some kind of EARL database Well now you can... If you POST your earl to http://jibbering.com/earldb/v.1 it will store it in a database (returns 500 status on error, or echos your RDF back to you if no error. You can then retrieve it with http://jibbering.com/earldb/v.1?url=testSubjectURL - It accepts the earl 0.95 namespace, and the earl1.0 Sean users and Nicks 1.0-test (any others by request.) When it combines two EARL reports, I've no idea if they make sense or are useful, but they seem to validate as RDF. It's very early in development, but feel free to play with it, don't be surprised if things break. Jim.
Received on Friday, 15 February 2002 08:41:16 UTC