W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-testsuite@w3.org > September 2010

Re: Reflection tests

From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:35:33 +0200
Message-ID: <4CA32485.9090008@opera.com>
To: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
CC: public-html-testsuite@w3.org
On 09/27/2010 01:54 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> I've been working on a test suite in my spare time for a while,
> testing reflected attributes:
>
> http://aryeh.name/tests/reflection.html
>
> Since I'm an HTMLWG member, I'd check it into Mercurial, but there are
> two things that make me hesitate:
>
> 1) It doesn't use the existing framework for pure JS tests, but
> instead uses something I wrote myself.

This is not a blocker. If we decide to port it to the existing 
framework, we can do that and make whatever changes are necessary to the 
framework to accommodate those tests later rather than waiting for it.

> 2) I'm still actively developing the tests, and they're all contained
> in one file, so it's not like we could easily chop them up into pieces
> and call some stable and others not.

Right, so it is not sensible to approve the tests yet. I don't think 
this is a big problem either.

> So I'm interested in hearing what people think.  Should I check them
> into hg regardless and just make it clear they still need work done?

In my opinion, yes. The only question is whether to use tests/Submitted 
for this or add e.g. tests/InProgress (feel free to bikeshed the name). 
I am happy with either.

> Also, how will review be conducted with this many tests?  A
> source-code review would make much more sense than trying to review
> each actual test.

Indeed.
Received on Wednesday, 29 September 2010 11:36:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 29 September 2010 11:36:13 GMT