Re: Test cases for parseType mis-spelling errors

It had occurred to me that scoping test cases was likely to be 
tricky;  clearly, test cases that address issues are desirable, but where 
to stop?

I had formed a view that if someone cared enough to actually create some 
test cases for a non-issue, then they were probably worth including.  On 
reflection, I'd say:  if someone cares enough to produce the test cases, 
and at least 2 (?) others feel they're important enough to review, then 
they're probably worth including.  I think that could be done without 
incurring lots of WG effort.

I would request, however, that the test cases themselves include (brief) 
text that makes it clear what they are actually testing.  (Many already do, 
but some don't.)

#g
--

At 11:35 AM 10/20/01 +0100, Brian McBride wrote:
>If you'd like to extend the scope of the test cases document beyond that, 
>covering common errors and the like, that will be more work for the WG and 
>something we need to discuss.  I think this would be a great thing to do, 
>but I guess I have to act as charter policeman a bit here.
>
>Are you envisaging just a few extra test cases here and there, or 
>something requiring more significant effort?

------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne                    MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research              <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
------------------------------------------------------------