W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org > June 2007

Re: shaping up Xproc unit test thoughts

From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:10:57 +0100
Message-ID: <711a73df0706120310j6cbee5d8k22ae5538024fb134@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org

On 12/06/07, James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com> wrote:

> I would like to have multiple asserts in a single test...the test
> being analogous to a step
> i conflated everything (as usual)
> when testing for equivelence between the output of a pipeline (an
> input in t:test) it needs to be compared to an expected xml
> document....for other assertions like xpath or some true/false type
> things we wont need expected input (or we can...but it would be easier
> to define an option....but perhaps we just have a value attribute on
> the assert.

What's your definition of equivalent James?

Something like xml signature?


Dave Pawson
Received on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 10:11:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:24 UTC