W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > March 2009

RE: Comments on Microsoft Chapter 4 Tests

From: Grant, Melinda <melinda.grant@hp.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 01:40:21 +0000
To: Arron Eicholz <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Message-ID: <763AE400FE923441B74861D534DF25495DED282BB2@GVW0433EXB.americas.hpqcorp.net>
 
Arron said:
> We should avoid using any of the 
> special words (MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, 
> SHOULD, SHOULD NOT, RECOMMENDED, MAY and OPTIONAL) in pass 
> conditions. These all have special meanings and should be 
> used sparingly and only when it is really appropriate.

My take is that the 'may', 'should', or 'must' is now encoded in the meta flags, so so long as the test provides a good description of what the tester should see, it seems ok to me.  (Before we added the flags, I raised the same issue...)

> "Test passes if" 
> was our standard and clearly tells anybody when the test passes.

That works fine for simple tests (and we try to make them all simple), but for some tests the "Test passes if" statement would be too unwieldy.  For those I've adopted the practice of just describing the various pass conditions, e.g.: "This sentence is at the top of the third page".

Best wishes,

Melinda
Received on Thursday, 19 March 2009 01:42:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 20 September 2010 17:51:58 GMT