Re: [sensors] Conformance requirements for concrete specs

Yes, although there are some details for which we probably have to 
pave our own cowpath. Some thoughts below:

1. Requirements for which one can write "generic" test cases should be
 defined in the base spec. These test cases can be imported and reused
 by an extension spec test suite as is. Extension specs would pull in 
these requirements via the normative dependency. I guess this is the 
easy part.

1. Requirements that need to be adapted for the extension specs to be 
meaningful. This is the harder part, I guess. One way would be to mark
 such "abstract requirements" as non-normative content in the Generic 
Sensor API, and then in the Conformance section of each extension 
specification say:

 * UAs conforming to this [extension specification], must adapt and 
import X, Y, Z requirements, defined in the Generic Sensor API.

 * ... and in the Generic Sensor API have a non-normative example 
requirement X (to borrow your example): [Foobar Sensor API spec] must 
define a [FoobarSensorReading] interface that corresponds to the 
[FoobarSensor] interface [Foobar Sensor API spec] defines.

Better ideas?

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by anssiko
Please view or discuss this issue at 
https://github.com/w3c/sensors/issues/84#issuecomment-177862649 using 
your GitHub account

Received on Monday, 1 February 2016 09:02:54 UTC