- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 04:01:21 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- cc: Claus Thøgersen <thoeg@get2net.dk>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Not only is RDF a good way to measure this kind of informtion, but there already exists a scheme for doing so. My suggestion for using it is to provide a link to external metadata in the page in question. There is an example of how to use such a scheme (it is actually defined for an authoring tool meeting ATAG, but the only changes that are required for a simple version are to use WCAG checkpoints instead) at http://www.w3.org/1999/11/11-WWW-Proposal/atagdemo but the scheme itself is not defined anywhere. If people are interested, or i get time, that should be fixed - at the very least by putting a document at the namespace referred to. for the conformance scheme. Note also that there is a checkpoint in WCAG - 13.2 says "Provide metadata to add semantic information to pages and sites". We could probably be a bit more specific about what that means, but providing this kind of metadata might be a good technique. cheers Charles On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Kynn Bartlett wrote: Claus -- very good points. I especially like the idea of asking for whose benefit the logos are meant. A good way to do this would be to design our WCAG guidelines specifically for use as not only a "logo" (which is really the crudest form of compliance) but also as a detailed RDF statement. RDF -- for those of you who aren't familiar with it -- is basically like meta tags on steroids. They're a way of conveying meta information (information about information) using a standardized markup scheme which supports a variety of vocubularies. Using RDF, a site (or a page) could be labeled with a specific, detailed compliance rating. This could be read by the browser and information passed along to the user as appropriate -- for example, doing a query when hitting a site to determine if it is accessible to the user's needs. Additionally, the RDF itself could be converted to something visual using XSLT (since it's just an XML-derived language), and there is no reason that a textual or logo compliance claim could co-exist with an RDF compliance claim. --Kynn PS: I think William likes RDF. I just get that feeling. -- Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136 W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia September - November 2000: W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Monday, 23 October 2000 04:01:25 UTC