- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 11:11:02 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>
- Cc: WAI ER IG List <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
Well, one thing to do is to try and agree on URIs to use. For example, I have used the URIs of the checkpoints to cover claiming each individual checkpoint, and that is what WAINu, HERA, and Axforms all do. If you want to declare that 2 URIs mean the same thing you should use an OWL property: foo:waigl owl:sameAs bar:wcag1 which relies on tools that understand a bit of OWL to make it work. If you only want to require tools to understand RDF Schema you can go with foo:waigl rdfs:subClass bar:wcag1 AND bar:wcag1 rdfs:subClass foo:waigl So long as the information is available (Hera reports actually link to a bunch of stuff. Axforms reports include a lot of information in the report) whether a particular tool understands it or not is a problem for the tool developer. But having this kind of OWL stuff is probably useful. I recently wrote a piece for the WCAG group [1] explaining how to use some other OWL stuff to describe the fact that meeting some checkpoint was the same as meeting some set of sub-points - for example WCAG double-A is the set of WCAG level A plus all priority 2 checkpoints, but it applies equally for the more detailed work people are doing. The alternative is to make up special EARL magic which people would still have to implement - it seems to me easier to sell the idea that implementing this stuff is in fact doing stock-standard work for your basic parser, and you can expect to find the right piece of basic parser off the shelf if you look, rather than some once-off code useful only in EARL tools. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004AprJun/0025 cheers Chaals On Thu, 15 Apr 2004, Chris Ridpath wrote: > >EARL can be used to state that a particular resource passes or fails a >particular test. The test can be something subjective like the WAI >guidelines. We can use the earl:testcase element to make these sort of >statements. > >Our checker program makes a statement that a particular page passes or fails >the WAI guidelines and uses our URI as the definition of the WAI guidelines. >Example: > ><earl:testcase >rdf:resource="http://checker.atrc.utoronto.ca/wcag-1-0-aa.xml" /> > >Other programs will generate a similar statement and will reference their >definition of the WAI guidelines. Example: > ><earl:testcase rdf:resource="http://accessibility.tester/WCAG-AA.html" /> > >How can a program collect the EARL results from various checking tools and >tell if the page passes/fails the WAI guidelines? > >To put it another way - How can you tell that both programs are testing the >same guidelines? (Perhaps using the earl:testcase rdf:about attribute?) > >Chris > > 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, 15 April 2004 11:11:13 UTC