Re: GRDDL Test Documents - moving all the tests, including approved tests?

On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 11:18 +0000, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
[...]
> I think what Dan said about requiring a WG vote on every test that is 
> moved is both procedurally incorrect, and not a big obstacle.
>
> The test editor, and others at WG discretion, are empowered to make 
> editorial changes to the tests. In OWL this was explicit see:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/#change
> [[
> The editors may make editorial changes to approved and proposed tests. 
> This includes:
> ...
> Moving tests to conform with document naming conventions.
> ]]

I would rather not use that part of the OWL test process.

The URI of a test is an integral part of the test, especially
for EARL reporting purposes. If you move the test in URI space,
you modify it substantially, such that at least *my* approval
of it is void, and I think the WG's approval of it should be
void.

Changing the CVS last-modified date of the input/output files
in a test such that they're after the date of the decision
also makes the records much harder to audit.

Perhaps re-approving tests in bulk is not a big obstacle,
but I do see it as a consideration.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E