W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-testsuite@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Marking non-automated tests

From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 09:55:41 +0100
Message-ID: <51136C0D.2030506@w3.org>
To: Kris Krueger <krisk@microsoft.com>
CC: "'public-html-testsuite@w3.org'" <public-html-testsuite@w3.org>
On 06/02/2013 23:36 , Kris Krueger wrote:
> We've discussed adding meta-data to the list a few times....each time
> we have decided this was not a good option to pursue.

To what list? Do you have pointers to the arguments? I can't seem to 
find them in the archives.

> I'd suggest that we have a text file (format/file type is not a
> concern of mine) that holds this 'meta data' and other metadata (for
> example test is approved).

I would really rather not. Metadata capture should be designed in such a 
way that it ensures in as much as possible that it won't go out of date. 
External authoritative metadata such as in a text file is guaranteed to 
break. That's why I proposed inlining it (in the most lightweight manner 
I could think of).

Another option is to capture that in file names (if there's ".manual." 
in the file name, then it's manual).

Finally, we don't need metadata to mark a test as approved. Anything 
that's in the suite is approved since submissions are in pull requests.

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2013 08:57:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 7 February 2013 08:57:02 GMT