Closed kasperisager closed 5 years ago
TCDL is defined in XML using an XML schema with lots of schema constraints on allowed data types for elements, and whether elements are optional / required / occurs a specified number of times.
I'm guessing the data types can be expressed in JSON-LD, but what about signalling elements are optional / required / occur a specified number of times ?
These seem quite important constraints for a data interchange format. Would JSON Schema help here or is too immature? See https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues/612 for background.
There will be interop problems if there's no way of validating the TCDL is correct before submitting it (could write a tool to validate - but this means exchanging code as well as data)
Another important consideration on the input format is how easy it is to consume with different language types:
Dynamic, weakly typed input formats are much easier to consume with dynamic, weakly typed languages than with compiled, statically typed languages.
Reference:
Test Cases: https://auto-wcag.github.io/auto-wcag/auto-wcag-testcases/testcases.json
Earl Outputs: https://github.com/w3c/earl/tree/master/earl-reports
This is a proposal for adding context to the generated test cases - https://auto-wcag.github.io/auto-wcag/auto-wcag-testcases/testcases.json. Idea being to embrace TCDL, to express test cases.