24/25 June F2F Summary

IRC Logs


Nadia Heninger, Ian Hickson, Liddy Nevile, Nick Kew, Jim Ley, Wendy Chisholm, Max Froumentin, Nick Gibbins, Dan Brickley, Libby Miller, Charles McCathieNevile, Bert Bos (Tuesday only)

Via phone and/or IRC

Marja-Riitta Koivunen, Eric Prud'hommeaux, Giorgio Brajnik, Sean B. Palmer

Summaries of Issues

Severity axis - "annotating failure"

Use cases still not covered?

Test dependencies

Is the following possible to assert in EARL?

I cannot tell if test #53 fails until I run test #63.

Atomic tests

  1. Need to be able to say that X atomic tests add up to checkpoint 1.1. (If one failure, all fail.)

Test corpus

This issue has two parts:

  1. test suite (test cases)
  2. large amount of earl data to test and play with

What needs to be done:

  1. identify tools (to generate EARL)
  2. find a place to store the data
  3. determine what to test against

Test Cases (test suite)

Start with:

This will tie in well with WCAG test suite work.

Also need:

Tools to generate data:

Schema issues

  1. Need DAML+OIL? (the following proposals get rid of reliance on?)
  2. Split schema into 2
  3. proposal to get rid of rdf reification names
  4. proposal to use bnodes for the subject
  5. nmg's proposed change for results (gets rid of subclasses of properties)
  6. proposal to use a constrained RDF syntax (with a DTD)
  7. proposal to have a simple and a complex version, mappable with XSLT
  8. Point to test cases not specs.

These proposals had support among everyone in the room. WAC took an action to discuss with SBP.

Changes to documentation

  1. Added several use cases
  2. Added queries for each use case
  3. Deleted use cases for
  4. Explain camelcase (class/Property, RDF convention)
  5. Danbri suggested we look at Dublin Core "instance documents" and the RSS documentation for ideas for documentation (good instances of teaching by example).
  6. Dave Pawson suggested we create an XML DTD to help people understand what an instance of EARL would look like. He created one, then we spent time updating it based on the schema discussions.

Action items

  1. Dave Pawson - send info about ATLAS
  2. DanBri, Libby, Charles, Wendy, Nadia and Eric (did we volunteer eric or did he agree?) took an action item to figure out and create a generic RDF database to store the EARL results (test corpus).
  3. Danbri - Once publish EARL 1.0 to TR, solicit review from RDFIG (and other communities).
  4. WAC - once publish EARL 1.0 to TR, solicit review from QA.
  5. Dave Pawson - agreed to be "guinea pig" for reivew of spec (as an XML developer).
  6. NH try to re-order the spec to be clearer about the role of different pieces (completed it during the meeting @@LINK)
  7. Nick Kew - write up HTML pointer documentation
  8. action wendy take latest back to reagle for discussion/ACTION: Wendy - investigate XML signature technique (xpointer, refer to discussion on 24 june 2002 14:04:41)
  9. WAC - look into the Dublin Core "instance documents" and the RSS documentation for ideas for documentation (good instances of teaching by example). (MaxF is interested in this, DanBri said he would send references).
  10. Charles look over the use cases and see what features they need to use.
  11. nmg write up list of questions about schema
  12. wendy to talk to sbp about changes in schema
  13. DP, CMN, JL discuss TestSubject (discussion begins ~15:21:23 25 June 2002)
  14. ih: send something to the list re: severity (define it)
  15. wac define operator ala prev discussion.
  16. wac: email dtd (with changes) to the list (done)
  17. WAC take the issue of Test Point Definition Language to QA.

$Date: 2002/07/24 16:27:14 $ Wendy Chisholm