Emmanuelle
have you been able to read the metadata terms we are working on -
they reflect the specs in WCAG but in a metadata way and give much
more flexibility ... there is a fairly comprehensive set and they are
about to become an ISO standard at least for education....
The DC conformsTo etc simply did not give us enough useful
information about the resource..so we have added a few qualifiers and
one new term
Liddy
On 07/02/2007, at 11:21 PM, Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo wrote:
>
> Hi Liddy,
>
> Thanks for your quickly response.
>
> Well, if there are not such thing as an "accessible" resource, my
> life don't
> have sense <smile> Because I'm working from 1996 about the
> accessibility in
> the software and the Web. But I understand what you want to say and
> the
> posture of the group about this <smile>
>
> And yes, in the future HERA will produce RDF reports on the
> adaptability
> characteristics of a resource, I hope so.
>
> For the moment I'm working around the "accessibility" concept (but
> with and
> eye in the adaptability too). This means: conform with the WCAG or
> another
> guidelines.
>
> And I know the "dcterms:conformsTo", but I'm looking for a way to
> say: this
> resource don't conform and don't want conform, and don't must conform
> <smile>.
>
> All the best,
> Emmanuelle
>
>
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: DCMI Accessibility Community [mailto:DC-
> [log in to unmask]] En
> nombre de Liddy Nevile
> Enviado el: miércoles, 07 de febrero de 2007 0:47
> Para: [log in to unmask]
> Asunto: Re: Not accessible or not adaptable.
>
> Emmanuelle
>
> As it is not ever clear that there is such a thing as an 'accessible'
> resource but that resources are accessible or otherwise to
> individual users,
> I would suggest that you write metadata on the resource, following the
> scheme we are developing for DC, and then individuals or later,
> computers,
> can match those resources to user's individual needs and preferences.
> The metadata we are working on makes objective statements about the
> characteristics of the resource, not claims about accessibility or
> otherwise. We describe this as metadata related to the adaptability
> of a
> resource but do not say yes or no, rather declare the
> characteristics. Of
> course, we note what makes a difference in line with the W3C
> guidelines and
> other work.
>
> For more info I suggest you see the DC page and then look at what
> is on the
> wiki where there is a lot more detail.
>
> http://dublincore.org/groups/access/
> http://dublincore.org/accessibilitywiki
>
> In fact, we would love to see Sidar adapt HERO to produce RDF
> reports on the
> adaptability characteristics of resources in the future.
>
> Liddy
>
>
> On 07/02/2007, at 7:26 AM, Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> This group was working in how define the adaptability's resource.
>> But I need
>> a way to declare / define that a resourse don't be and don't will be
>> accessible or adaptable.
>>
>> For example, we have some resource to teach accessibility that don't
>> conform the WCAG. These are bad practice examples, and must be not
>> accessibles.
>>
>> How can I preserve its that a review or classification as "bad"
>> resources?
>>
>> Sorry if I can explain it properly, my English is very bad, but I
>> hope
>> that someone can understand me and explain it to the others.
>>
>> Any idea?
>>
>> All the best,
>> Emmanuelle
|