- From: James Graham <james@hoppipolla.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 14:10:41 +0900
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, Geoffrey Sneddon <me@gsnedders.com>, public-css-testsuite@w3.org
- Cc: public-test-infra@w3.org
On 29/10/15 13:44, Chris Lilley wrote: > Hello Geoffrey, > > Wednesday, October 28, 2015, 5:21:33 PM, you wrote: >> * We should get rid of metadata, at least in the common case, > > The crucial bit of metadata is a link to *what section of the spec is > actually tested*. > > If someone writing a test cannot provide a link to what is actually > being tested, the test is at best worthless and at worst, damaging. > But for the common case, a test author does know, they have the > relevant spec open as they write the test, so dropping in that link > is trivial to do. > > Certainly there are other metadata items which are optional, but this > one is simple to provide and adds a lot of value. > So I agree that sounds eminently reasonable. OTOH a random trawl through reftests in mozilla-central turned up very few where people had added this kind of link. So I conclude that even if it sounds like it's a good idea it isn't an emergent behaviour of browser developers and constitutes an extra burden for upstreaming tests compared to writing browser-specific tests.
Received on Thursday, 29 October 2015 05:12:56 UTC