Re: [tap] W3C Evaluation and Report Language (EARL)

"Bruno P. Kinoshita" <> Thu, 20 December 2012 11:26 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BA0421F87E1 for <>; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 03:26:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 3.2
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_43=0.6, REPTO_QUOTE_YAHOO=2.599]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kt9hFRVZD7Eu for <>; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 03:26:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5101E21F87DF for <>; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 03:26:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 20 Dec 2012 11:26:54 -0000
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 20 Dec 2012 11:26:54 -0000
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 20 Dec 2012 11:26:54 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
Received: (qmail 67073 invoked by uid 60001); 20 Dec 2012 11:26:54 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=s1024; t=1356002814; bh=6DJ8Jszefsh+7UY8/v4P2g/5RBulSpn6MlVAwgPB8jY=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=yOplSvtsX1xa3cGiHZ+S3JeArkQz3cDqxsRmhl0Odfn6EpF3QorvNXI4c8fi6F5//Ccz4Qx5+ICGr2KnN8JXhXj7k6qf28wWCqsPEW/G8HjVMCJoB9HiUAWoTP9FQB0drXQNznfDDRhLsZH8CDXg2hUbZUxdNyyvYPH8kIApDVY=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024;; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=TFVlyQmz6E+LAJiU6CjDk1r9jF5tfa3x5rA649SNU//4MjPR1GpVMLUMeT0OU47tY9PiISHBzJ2CZ1mjZMwZWXbopttZJnZ/ZJSJKf/r0d+o9mzs72Or+IZVdRrK5AUqQlJeqxH/VbBXz43MS08Cl1KpKaV5ghxq8T3HHQCYmKQ=;
X-YMail-OSG: DYwzIFgVM1nceHbgL8yGVoE10bLISFAvBhtWiRaNDzVEe2Y hqhFAq7auRXCsrPLZDR4YnzeW0GeoF0Nmu85gZ9VU7KzV7rauTQw8YnE__kJ CdqccRiCwcxzXiz49kRjVH7rg1BdZ9hsMdfDVAC7llQGh_6Ue3lPoO9nKVq_ XPrRYdfE4wZML1hsutFWKeOaZvWc5uB61aLD1BbsQcO5cBKDeke.K1FifILC o2.k7m2gPurgwsZViWPBdQSB16KvJ0dU7BXEpJloxRS5dqaIgLhtO.EaYboZ TKmfRzJXpxjAcp4tIH.cCLx2niCsUzpjHIygnx2SoAgE22iJf86XCCYHuCy_ Y47KuvbfWCamKk6GJh_m0jSIwLHipmB24L3tNwD1oCVHEnXz9igdZRQm8Spy IVdUm.uS5AsixGLyn35H5UEnlcUdc0J3Svxj3v0bwn4rJQwKvYLDbSX31OHV KHYtxGgjPQTu6zuLJI310O2l0Zft64wk4j78Dsh.VxfFNDdJPWuiIGhpj5kY z1fBgyx.fwirwy1oAbafoUfmb_uqu6d6wuULcy0ejzKUzuwTVtOjph6JBP8T qAUNDUzRlosDbfRCzgD7c7.95APvRMmMiyjjv7lwoZ1U_cJCyuO983aREh2W juz69tzOnj36LYnCWo0gvIX0wFPfly5m5vubGSiKzk3_HTX20p_8zW5PJSBA UAnAbNOhJFu5M9kE2l7ekqBuwyhKM8cf3pjp_Pgf4oe5Yddh.SqMKYf86cBY TtUI1OK29DF_nxPkWnYxbbjuu1HcrgvR2gx_VnGxD4Tr1zMwTAA_Lan_KU2L I4W0a4KDSWuwXwpYtoAqx1qz3bgS8GonS0oU7kRCtI9UsFmD0uVH7ZganrvL 3exsHZZL8wzZrpsngyfL6sk2jQzEm5avbuY4VTqM9fds6AQJUP_hhQRMvvNj EdjwclufyxhokxsaxmKAXeudF08y6sZDml2Th45R1Ef0868BvRvmVW1aFT7Q sPhSOvgz3DMlr876QvqV2w2mRFIOIUpGu_Hwt5uTKlXf4eC6ROiK3gA--
Received: from [] by via HTTP; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 03:26:54 PST
X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 001.001, SGkgYWxsLMKgCgpGb3IgdGhlIGxhc3QgdGhyZWUgd2Vla3Mgb3Igc28sIHRlc3Rhbnl0aGluZy5vcmcgaGFzIGJlZW4gZG93bi4gSSB0cmllZCBwaW5naW5nIHRoZSB0YXAgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0LCBidXQgZ290IG5vIHJlc3BvbnNlLiBUcmllZCB0byBjb250YWN0IFRlc3Q6Ok1vcmUgbWFpbnRhaW5lciB0byBzZWUgaWYgaGUga25ldyBzb21lb25lIHdpdGgga2FybWEgdG8gdXBkYXRlIHRoZSB3ZWIgc2l0ZSBidXQgZ290IG5vIHJlc3BvbnNlIHNvIGZhci4KClRoaXMgaXMgdGhlIGxhc3QgbWVzc2FnZSBJIGYBMAEBAQE-
X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/
References: <> <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 03:26:54 -0800 (PST)
From: "Bruno P. Kinoshita" <>
To: Steffen Schwigon <>, Christophe Strobbe <>
In-Reply-To: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "" <>, Shadi Abou-Zahra <>
Subject: Re: [tap] W3C Evaluation and Report Language (EARL)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: "Bruno P. Kinoshita" <>
List-Id: Test Anything Protocol WG discussions <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:26:56 -0000

Hi all, 

For the last three weeks or so, has been down. I tried pinging the tap mailing list, but got no response. Tried to contact Test::More maintainer to see if he knew someone with karma to update the web site but got no response so far.

This is the last message I found in my inbox regarding TAP, so I apologize beforehand for bothering you all :-)

Does anybody know where I can find one of the administrators, please? 

Thank you in advance, and sorry for the trouble.

All the best,

Bruno P. Kinoshita

> From: Steffen Schwigon <>
>To: Christophe Strobbe <> 
>Cc:; Shadi Abou-Zahra <> 
>Sent: Wednesday, November 9, 2011 6:25 PM
>Subject: Re: [tap] W3C Evaluation and Report Language (EARL)
>Christophe Strobbe <> writes:
>> Report Language (EARL) and a few related specifications. EARL's core
>> use case is reporting the results of accessibility evaluations of
>> websites (i.e. accessibility for persons with disabilities), but the
>> language itself is generic, so it can also be used in other
>> contexts. The language is based on RDF;
>> […]
>> During our last call for comments, one of the reviewers asked the
>> working group if EARL duplicates TAP's efforts, or vice versa. The
>> working group thinks that this is not the case; we think that EARL
>> could be an alternative report format for TAP if a TAP consumer could
>> be written that produces EARL. For this reason, we thought it would be
>> interesting to contact you and to make sure we are aware of each
>> other's work.
>Thanks for sync'ing this back to us. I just skimmed through the specs
>and it was indeed interesting. As far as I understand from my (very
>short) skimming I think it's not that many duplication of effort as the
>main difference is a philosophical one.
>- EARL is similar to other W3C specs in respect to specifying a
>  comprehensive snapshot of known existing topics. For example, it
>  particularly covers all known HTTP methods (POST, GET, PUT, …). That
>  enables it to build tools on top of it that sematically “know” what
>  the document is about.
>- TAP in contrast is about specifying test results, really just the
>  *result* focus without hard specification of the tested topic, i.e., a
>  single test has a “description”, so someone reading it knows what it
>  is about but that part does not have a specification. 
>  For instance, a test about a HTTP method could have any description
>  from “POST” to “that strange other method that I never remember but
>  always use when GET is not sufficient”.
>See [1] for some related discussion of this aspect.
>In this respect I think TAP is more like your RDF with some extensions
>from EARL to describe test success.
>That makes the use-cases of TAP and EARL a bit different: 
>- TAP allows to be produced by anything simple without toolchain
>  support, like embedded devices with nothing but a “print” function,
>  but you can not *sematically* evaluate results.
>- EARL seems to require more heavy toolchain support to produce but
>  allows more semantic result evaluation.
>Converting TAP to EARL is difficult. 
>Converting EARL to TAP is easy.
>On the evaluation of TAP I can point to TAP::DOM and Data::DPath, which
>provide a more structured approach to evaluate test results, see my “TAP
>Juggling” slides[2], page 30ff.
>Kind regards,
>Steffen Schwigon <>
>Dresden Perl Mongers <>
>tap mailing list