W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > April 2002

Re: New Definitons for Glossary

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 10:10:47 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020418100701.0402cec0@rockynet.com>
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 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:09 GMT