W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom-ts@w3.org > August 2001

RE: SURVEY: Test case naming

From: Jason Brittsan <jasonbri@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:56:20 -0700
Message-ID: <D5C70EA9DF70694391969A1494875A12040DD335@red-msg-05.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>, <www-dom-ts@w3.org>

A) -0
B) +0
C) +0
D) -0
E) -0
F) +1
G) +1

-----Original Message-----
From: Arnold, Curt [mailto:Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 1:27 PM
To: 'www-dom-ts@w3.org'
Subject: SURVEY: Test case naming

I'd like to take a survey on renaming the test cases currently in the
repository.  Anything other than A, E or G would probably require
intervention by someone well versed in CVS and with file system
access.

The NIST submitted Level 1 test cases are currently in the repository
with all lower case names that provide a summary of the tests (for
example, textsplittextnomodificationallowederr.xml).  Should
we:

A) Do nothing
B) Rename the repository files to MixedCaseNames.xml preserving their
current history.
C) Rename the repository files to camelCaseNames.xml preserving their
current history.
D) Rename them to InterfaceNameDD (for example, Node01.xml) preserving
their current history.
E) Rename them to InterfaceNameDD by committing new files and deleting
the current files hiding the revision history since Sunday.
F) Rename them to InterfaceName_FeatureDD (for example,
Node_nodeValue01.xml) preserving their current history.
G) Rename them to InterfaceName_FeatureDD by committing new files and
deleting the current files hiding the revision history.

If we want to do anything, we should do it now before the tests get out.

Again, Vote +1 for something that you would prefer, +0 for something
that you'd go along with, -0 for something that you'd prefer didn't
happen but would tolerate, and -1 for something that you are
against.

Any other options?

My votes:

A) +0
B) +0
C) -0
D) +0
E) +0
F) +0.5
G) +0.5

Reasoning: Okay, I didn't follow the rules, I'm only half-hearted on
this.  I think that the shorter names would be more pleasing on test
matrixes and other reports.
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2001 16:57:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:34:03 UTC