W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-annotation@w3.org > March 2010

ACTION-208 done

From: Pierre-Antoine <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:10:49 +0100
Message-ID: <4B9648D9.70906@liris.cnrs.fr>
To: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
As per ACTION 208, I read the Test Methodology document [1] in order to
see how it can be apply by the WG for designing our test cases.

My conclusion is that the document is not really applicable in our case.
The document is mainly oriented to specification defining conformance
requirements using natural language (with standard verbs such as MUST,
SHOULD, MAY... as typically defined by [2]), aiming at annotating them
in order to check them and turn them into operational test cases.

In our case, conformance is mainly defined by the mapping tables, which
are already quite format and don't need, IMHO, futher annotation or
formalization. I also note that our document do not refer to [2], which
seems to confirm the inadequacy of the test-methodology document.


[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/test-methodology/
[2] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt

Received on Tuesday, 9 March 2010 13:11:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:17:37 UTC