W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > October 2003

Re: definition of test assertion

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2003 13:55:15 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20031005134220.0232a290@terminal.rockynet.com>
To: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org

At 01:38 PM 9/15/2003 -0400, Lynne Rosenthal wrote:
>The current definition of Test Assertion:
>
> From the QA Glossary: http://www.w3.org/QA/glossary
>Test Assertion
>A set of premises that are known to be true by definition in the spec.
> From the SpecGL, which builds upon this definition, further refining it 
> in the context of SpecGL
>Test Assertion
>     a statement of behavior, action, or condition that can be measured or 
> tested.

We should take care that we do not (unintentionally) lose the resolution of 
this definition issue (LC-73.9, [1]).  We said that we would make the 
various definitions consistent wherever they occur.  More specifically, we 
said ([2] & [1]) that we would take the definition from the specgl text 
([3] & [4]) and propogate that to the QA Glossary.  Not the other way 
around, which is how understand the above.

Complete paragraph at [3]:  "A test assertion is a statement of behavior, 
action, or condition that can be measured or tested. It is derived from the 
specification's requirements and provides a normative foundation from which 
test cases can be built.. Each test assertion is an independent, complete, 
testable statement for requirements in the specification. Each test 
assertion results in one or more test cases. Multiple test assertions can 
be combined to form a test case, in this case one tests multiple facets of 
a particular behavior. It is recommended that test assertions be available 
by the time a specification enters Proposed Recommendation."

Definition at [4]:  "a statement of behavior, action, or condition that can 
be measured or tested (See also QA Glossary [QA-GLOSSARY].)"

As I recall the discussion at Heraklion -- we pondered integrating the 
definitions, and/or integrating Leonid's suggested synthesis of the 
definitions, and decided against it.  (But this recollection is not minuted.)

-Lofton.

[1] http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/lc-issues#x73
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2003Jun/0041
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/guidelines-chapter#Gd-include-assertions
[4] http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/definitions
Received on Sunday, 5 October 2003 16:02:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:14 GMT