- From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 10:10:47 -0600
- To: Sandra Martinez <sandra.martinez@nist.gov>
- Cc: Mark Skall <mark.skall@nist.gov>, www-qa-wg@w3.org
At 10:13 AM 4/17/02 -0400, Sandra Martinez wrote: >The following are examples of test assertions developed for the XML Test >Suite. I basically developed these semantic requirements guided by the >statement that ... The following words are the kind of stuff that I think would be helpful to add to the definition. More is better, if it adds to the understanding and comprehensibility >a semantic requirement should be a simple statement that capture an >expected normative behavior, as defined by the specification, that also >facilitates the generation of specific testcases and proper mapping back >to the assertion and the specification. > As I have said before, it might be helpful to include examples in the definition. One or more of the following, a couple examples from other Recs, whatever... > A document consisting of prolog followed by element then > miscelaneous items is > a well-formed document. > > A well formed document must have one or more elements. > > A processing instruction with only a processing > instruction target name > is a valid processing instruction. > > The character data in the CDATA section is not markup data. -Lofton.
Received on Thursday, 18 April 2002 12:10:41 UTC