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

Re: Missing important tests ?

From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris@ontologicon.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 22:33:34 +0300
Message-Id: <200110191123.f9JBNEE04973@mail.24-7webhosting.com>
To: Jan-Arve Saether <jana@birdstep.org>
Cc: "<Www-Dom-Ts@W3.Org>" <www-dom-ts@W3.Org>

On Thursday, October 18, 2001, at 02:15  PM, Jan-Arve Saether wrote:

> After a brief look at the tests, I am still missing some important
> tests (I am not sure how many new tests have been added since the NIST
> tests)
>
> I am missing tests that actually test *all* functions on an interface,
> including testing methods on interfaces that was inherited, even if they
> make no sense.
>
[dd] Pretty early on, there was an implicit understanding that not all 
facets of a particular method could be tested as this introduces an 
ever-growing set of tests that would need to be written.

I'm not all too happy about this, so please provide any feedback/ideas 
on how we could solve this (for practical reasons, however, we are 
limiting the TS to testing the most basic functions of each method).


> (For example, Text::getChildNodes should return a NodeList with no 
> nodes.
> The same goes for ProcessingInstruction::getFirstChild etc. The list 
> goes
> on.)
>
> What we have done where I am working is to test absolutely all functions
> on one interface, and then test if the method behaves as expected.
> (E.g test if Text::getFirstChild returns NULL etc.)
>
> I consider a conformance test to be incomplete if such tests are not
> included.
>
> Are somebody working on this issue?
>
> Best regards
> Jan-Arve S ther
>
Received on Friday, 19 October 2001 07:23:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 6 April 2009 12:58:45 GMT