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

Re: Marking non-automated tests

From: Wolfram Kriesing <wk@uxebu.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 09:58:18 +0100
Message-ID: <CACQ4vkHCiwb8jCZkVuH0eCPHpA+_CUe=bwBy6GoTbBZ8z9op+g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
Cc: "public-html-testsuite@w3.org" <public-html-testsuite@w3.org>
I am following the list quietly, with interest :).
Maybe I introduce myself a bit. I am Wolfram Kriesing, from uxebu,
a small JavaScript company. I had been working on an alike project
a web test suite, that was open sourced by vodafone
I didn't work on it lately, but I see huge value in this kinda thing.

When I saw the topic of manual tests appearing here, my trigger
was pulled :). I see manual tests is one of the important and inevitable things
a test suite includes. Even running the danger that it is a little off topic:
I am curious if there are any discussions or plans to
1) host the test for execution and (the imho important thing)
2) to collect all the data
What do i mean? maybe it becomes obvious when running one of the
simple tests we used to build in that old test suite
the test ist manual and the results are sent back to a server, so
we can generate stats about pass/fail on certain browsers
and devices ... unfortunately we never generated any stats yet :(

If this is a topic I would be interested in helping on it, I see a lot
of potential and things to do there :) Can I read up on the current plans
regarding this somewhere?

Kind regards / Saludos / Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Wolfram Kriesing - CTO, Co-Founder

Flash on the iPad? We make it work!
kriesing@uxebu.com, mobile: +49 174 300 4595
uxebu Inc.

On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> wrote:
> Hi gang,
> I've been running some analyses on the tests we have in the suite, and I'm
> noticing a rather large bunch of tests that aren't properly automated. I
> knew there were some, but I hadn't realised it was this many.
> A lot of those I've seen can be converted to testharness, and should be.
> I'll be producing a list of all conversion candidates.
> But some tests just have to remain as manual or reftests. We've had some
> conventions to mark those up, but nothing seems to have been used
> consistently at this point.
> The existing conventions seem to be mostly about using <meta>. I was
> wondering if we shouldn't just use something simpler. How about
>   <html data-manual>
> ?
> --
> Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2013 11:04:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:14:32 UTC