- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 19:07:15 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
- Cc: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org
I'd do this differently. The idea is that you make a property called nick:accept - it is generally a subclass of earl:fail, because the implied result is that the checkpoint has not been met, but in your reporting you treat it as you treat an earl:pass. This leaves you with earl:cannotTell for your proposed Review, and earl:fail for your proposed repair property. And declaring the schema like that means that your results are readily interoperable with others - nick:acceptIt might be considered fine in the reporting logic for some checkpoints. This strikes me as similar to Hixie's desire to subclass fail according to whether it was a recorded bug that caused the problem, or consequent on something else, or a catastrophic failure, etc... my 2 bits Chaals On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Nick Kew wrote: > > >Someone mentioning EARL prompts me to post this ... > >In the course of developing Site Valet Enterprise Edition 2.0, >I've integrated a full accessibility audit trail. Pages will be >assessed by an automatic agent, and may (or must, according to >local policy) then be reassessed by a human. > >For the AccessValet desktop tool, it is sufficient to generate >a result (Pass/Fail/Unknown/unchecked) and a separate conclusion. >But for the sitewide database and audit trail, what is required >is a single-word status to appear in query results, etc. I'm >currently using a slightly different vocabulary, that doesn't >fit as well as (IMO) it should with EARL: > > * Pass > No problems with that one > * Accept > An informed decision not to comply with some part of the > guidelines. > * Review > No conclusion has been reached and the page should be reviewed. > * Repair > The page has been reviewed and repairs have been identified. > A much more positive thing than "Fail" to say to users! > >These are supported by more detailed reports equivalent to the >Executive Summary from the desktop product. But should I be concerned >about departing from EARL vocabulary in the above? > > > >-- >Nick Kew > Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles tel: +61 409 134 136 SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe fax(france): +33 4 92 38 78 22 Post: 21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia or W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Thursday, 31 July 2003 19:07:15 UTC