- From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 17:46:27 +0100
- To: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
- Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Le jeudi 12 novembre 2009 à 17:35 +0100, Marcos Caceres a écrit : > On the other hand, automated test generation can generate a large number > of test cases and is less prone to human errors. But, at the same time, > it cannot test some things that are written in the prose. For example, a > AU must not fire Storage events when first populating the preferences > attribute. This is impossible to express in IDL. I complete agree that manual tests bring a lot of value, but I think it would be unwise to refuse automated tests that express exactly what the spec expresses — in particular, they can be extremely useful to detect bugs in the WebIDL defined in the specs, bugs that are extremely unlikely to be detected through manual testing. In other words, I don’t see why manually and automatically created tests are mutually exclusive, and I see very clearly how they can complete each other. Dom
Received on Thursday, 12 November 2009 16:46:45 UTC