W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert@w3.org > October 2006

Re: validity levels

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 17:26:50 +0700
To: "Johannes Koch" <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>, public-wai-ert@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.thw8m0ezwxe0ny@widsith.lan>

On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 17:21:15 +0700, Johannes Koch  
<johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de> wrote:

>
> Carlos A Velasco schrieb:
>> Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote:
>>> If the test is "does the Java unit compile" or "is the Java
>>> code valid" then these warnings you describe *are* subclasses of  
>>> 'pass'.
>>> What are you testing for?
>>  If you take, let us say, a c/c++ compiler with different optimization
>> levels, warnings could be a subclass of "pass" or "fail":
>
> or cannotTell
>
>> it is not
>> clear to me which one to take.
>
> IMHO compiler warnings are a pass of the "but you should do better" kind.

The point is that warnings are used with such a total lack of  
interoperability in terms of a validity level that making an instance  
class called warning is a bad idea unless we want to bring that level of  
non-interoperability into EARL results.

Cheers

Chaals

-- 
   Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
   hablo español  -  je parle français  -  jeg lærer norsk
chaals@opera.com          Try Opera 9 now! http://opera.com
Received on Tuesday, 24 October 2006 10:27:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:27 GMT