Re: EARL Testcase

Thanks for the helpful suggestions.

I think it may be simpler though if we could all agree on a URI that
represents the guideline. You've taken this approach with checkpoints and it
works fine. Example from Sidar's HERA:

rdf:resource="" />

How about using
<earl:testcase rdf:resource=>
to represent the WCAG 1.0 level 'A' guideline?


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Charles McCathieNevile" <>
To: "Chris Ridpath" <>
Cc: "WAI ER IG List" <>
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 11:11 AM
Subject: Re: EARL Testcase

> Well, one thing to do is to try and agree on URIs to use. For example, I
> 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
> 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
> 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
> set of sub-points - for example WCAG double-A is the set of WCAG level A
> all priority 2 checkpoints, but it applies equally for the more detailed
> 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
> 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
> look, rather than some once-off code useful only in EARL tools.
> [1]
> 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
> >the WAI guidelines and uses our URI as the definition of the WAI
> >Example:
> >
> ><earl:testcase
> >rdf:resource="" />
> >
> >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
> >tell if the page passes/fails the WAI guidelines?
> >
> >To put it another way - How can you tell that both programs are testing
> >same guidelines? (Perhaps using the earl:testcase rdf:about attribute?)
> >
> >Chris
> >
> >
> Charles McCathieNevile  tel: +61 409 134
> SWAD-E         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 11:58:03 UTC