 |
 |
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