- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 19:31:52 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>
- Cc: WAI ER IG List <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>, David Weinkauf <d.weinkauf@utoronto.ca>
That would work (so long as you promise to put it in quotes so it is valid :-) Alternatively (or as well) we could ask the WCAG group to provide some identifiers which we could then use in techniques notes too. I recall trying to do this once, but I think it might have been for Authoring Tools - there should be something in there that makes sense as an identifier. But I can't guarantee it... (And checking, it turns out to be a figment of my imagination :-( Until I could use OWL to explain the realtionship in a machine-readable way I haven't really bothered including conformance level claims in the work I have done (since they were not terribly relevant to the aspects that were important to what I was doing). Cheers Chaals On Thu, 15 Apr 2004, Chris Ridpath wrote: >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: > ><earl:testcase >rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/#tech-text-equivalent" /> > >How about using ><earl:testcase rdf:resource=http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/#a/> >to represent the WCAG 1.0 level 'A' guideline? > >Chris > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org> >To: "Chris Ridpath" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca> >Cc: "WAI ER IG List" <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org> >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 >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 > 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 19:31:53 UTC