- From: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 12:41:34 -0600 (MDT)
- To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>
- cc: www-qa@w3.org
On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Sean B. Palmer wrote: > I agree that the path that you have outlined is something to be > extremely wary of, but I hope that EARL did not arise as a link in > that particular chain. I did not mean to imply that EARL creation was prompted by the dark force behind the outlined path. AFAIK, EARL was created and is being designed independently from the issues discussed here. EARL is a tool. Tools cannot be at fault. However, it may be worth noting that every time the discussion turns to the topic of conformance and compliance, somebody proposes that a one-for-all conformance description language is needed (which, in turn, prompts people to point to EARL). This brings us one step closer to the 13th step in the "plan". Alex.
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2001 14:41:46 UTC