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

Re: Coverage analysis

From: Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 21:16:29 +0000
To: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
CC: "'public-html-testsuite@w3.org'" <public-html-testsuite@w3.org>, public-test-infra <public-test-infra@w3.org>
Message-ID: <F9981AFB970564408FEB7DFCF62D44084711FC37@PRN-MBX01-4.TheFacebook.com>
On 2/11/13 9:04 PM, "Robin Berjon" <robin@w3.org> wrote:

>[...]

Thanks for the write-up.

>If you can tell me what you mean by "better visuals" I can easily make
>it happen. Do you mean "make it look less like a train wreck for
>instance by adding boilerplate like Bootstrap" or something else?

Something else. Exposing coverage info for all specs is key when deciding
where to focus test writing efforts[1] and then how to measure progress.

I'd like this data to be exposed (e.g. using d3.js[2]) in a central
location (thinking the test/test-doc center) in such a way that it becomes
trivial to answer questions such as:

* I have half a day to write tests, I want to focus on JS APIs, where can
I be most impactful?
* Did I make a dent today with those 12 tests I wrote?
* How's the overall test coverage of all the specs included in Coremob[3]?
* What's the state of HTML5 coverage compare to last quarter. Are we
seeing progress?
* I'm the CEO of W3C, is this W3C fellow handling testing actually getting
something done, or is he spending his time making nifty data
visualizations? Oh, my! This is so pretty!

--tobie (with my W3C fellow cap on and from the wrong email account.
Sorry.)

---
[1] Arguably, we'd still have to factor info on which parts of the specs
are known to have multiple interoperable implementations in order to focus
our efforts, but please bear with me.
[2] http://d3js.org/
[3] http://coremob.github.com/coremob-2012/FR-coremob-20130131.html
Received on Monday, 11 February 2013 21:18:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 11 February 2013 21:18:16 GMT