- From: Arron Eicholz <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:33:11 +0000
- To: "Grant, Melinda" <melinda.grant@hp.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
> Melinda Grant wrote: > 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...) > I agree the flags are really important but we need to avoid using the reserved words unless the case actually is a specific case that is a 'may', 'should', 'must', etc... case. > > "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". > There are always a few exceptions and in certain cases if might make sense (like paged media) but in general all cases should have some consistency. I would assume that most of the paged media cases follow a similar pattern throughout? -- Thanks, Arron Eicholz
Received on Thursday, 19 March 2009 18:34:10 UTC