W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > September to December 2000

Re: Conformance Test for HTTP 1.1

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 14:13:54 -0700
To: Caveman <hoffmankeith@hotmail.com>
Cc: Miles Sabin <msabin@cromwellmedia.co.uk>, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
Message-ID: <20001007141352.A842@mnot.net>
On Sat, Oct 07, 2000 at 03:54:58PM -0500, Caveman wrote:
> I just want to put my two cents into this conversation:
> 
> I think the idea of doing compliancy testing is great.  And the idea of
> having one "check everything test" is also a good thought.  However, how do
> we guarantee that the test scenarios created are actually following the
> "specs"?
> 
> I think this is something better left to outside agencies to address.  The
> testing game tends to get to be too industry biased.  Whether intentionally
> or not you will see tests similar to this proposed one done and get totally
> different results depending on who does it.
> 
> I know this actually sounds like a good argument to create a "standard
> test", but in my opinion this leads the doorway too wide open to start
> skewing the tests in favor of one manufacturer/developer vs. another one.  I
> realize that there are currently many industry leaders involved in this
> organization and they provide valuable insights.  However, they are just
> involved in the CREATION of standards, not in judging the conformance to
> them.
> 
> In short, while this is a good idea with the best interests of everyone in
> mind, I think this is probably stepping outside of the charter of the
> organization.

These are pretty much the arguments that I remember people making at WREC in
Pittsburgh, and I think it's a good point. This is why I'm holding out hope
for the W3C...


-- 
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Saturday, 7 October 2000 22:14:51 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 06:33:40 EDT