- From: John Jansen <John.Jansen@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 21:33:04 +0000
- To: "Linss, Peter" <peter.linss@hp.com>
- CC: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Thanks Peter. I was thinking of bugzilla for both spec and test case issues only for simplicity. If you've got another tool already (or mostly) implemented, that's great. You may be right that MultiCol is small enough to discuss in email, but that could be true of a lot of coming test suites. I still think it's a best practice to use the tracking tool for all test suites so there is no confusion and no difficulty finding the open/resolved/closed issues. That said, not having the tool ready is certainly not blocking moving the test suite forward, I'd just like to be able to go to one place to see all the current issues without searching email archives. -John -----Original Message----- From: Linss, Peter [mailto:peter.linss@hp.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 1:47 PM To: John Jansen Cc: Håkon Wium Lie; www-style@w3.org; public-css-testsuite@w3.org Subject: Re: [css3-multicol] tests submitted While we agreed to start tracking spec issues in Bugzilla, we didn't agree to use it for tracking test issues. I'm actually in the process of building a custom solution for tracking test case issues (and it will do a lot more besides), so I don't want to start tracking issues elsewhere and have to migrate data. I hope to have something online soon, but in the meanwhile I don't think the MultiCol test suite is so large that we can't track its issues over email and the wiki. Peter On May 17, 2011, at 11:31 AM, John Jansen wrote: > Peter, et al. > > I think we should use MultiCol as a forcing function for moving our test case issues into Bugzilla. Unfortunately, I will not be at the F2F in Japan to discuss, but has there been any progress on this front? I suspect others will have some further comments or issues with these test cases as well as others moving forward, and keeping track in a database makes the most sense to me. > > -John > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On >> Behalf Of Linss, Peter >> Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2011 4:08 PM >> To: Håkon Wium Lie >> Cc: www-style@w3.org; public-css-testsuite@w3.org >> Subject: Re: [css3-multicol] tests submitted >> >> Hi Håkon, >> >> a few quick comments: >> >> 1) The test titles should be more descriptive, not just the filename >> 2) You really, really need to add links to the appropriate section of >> the specification (the test harness needs these, the build system >> will soon, and it's just good form) >> 3) Please add an assertion >> 4) Don't forget any requirement flags, if applicable >> 5) Ideally, new tests should be self-describing reftests >> >> Peter >> >> [1] http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/format#title-element >> [2] http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/format#specification-links >> [3] http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/format#test-assertions >> [4] http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/format#requirement-flags >> [5] http://wiki.csswg.org/test/reftest >> >> On May 15, 2011, at 12:12 PM, Håkon Wium Lie wrote: >> >>> I've submitted the beginnings of an automated test suite: >>> >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> - >> b >>> asic-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> - >> b >>> asic-001.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> - >> b >>> asic-002.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> - >> b >>> asic-003.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> - >> b >>> reak-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -f >>> ill-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -f >>> ill-001.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> - >> g >>> ap-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> - >> o >>> verflow-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -r >>> educe-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -r >>> ule-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -r >>> ule-001.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -r >>> ule-dashed-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -r >>> ule-dotted-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -r >>> ule-double-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -r >>> ule-groove-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -r >>> ule-hidden-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -r >>> ule-inset-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -r >>> ule-none-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -r >>> ule-outset-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -r >>> ule-ridge-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -r >>> ule-solid-000.xht >>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/howcome/submitted/multicol >>> -s >>> pan-000.xht >>> >>> The tests are fairly basic, but covers most of the specification. >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-multicol >>> >>> For a more human-friendly test, this page contains (variations of) >>> all the individual tests. >>> >>> http://people.opera.com/howcome/2011/tests/multicol.html >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> -h&kon >>> Håkon Wium Lie CTO °þe®ª >>> howcome@opera.com http://people.opera.com/howcome >>> >> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 17 May 2011 21:33:35 UTC