Re: RDF Core test driven development and QA Test Doc

>> How did you demonstrate the existence of more than one conformant
>> (and presumably interoperable) implementations?

>As I understand it (as a close observer from the outside), the group
>saw itself as defining a language/data-format, not any particular
>software at all.  It wasn't really clear how interoperability could be
>demontrated.

My presumption is that if the class of product being defined is a
language, then the WG issues a schema (or equivalent) for it. You test
an instance by trying to validate it against the schema.

We seem to be converging on the difference between a simple
definition...

"The 'em' element indicates the included text content has emphasis."
[Whatever "emphasis" might be....]

and a specification....

"Text within the 'em' element must be rendered by the browser in a
form that is more prominent than surrounding non-emphasized text."

The specification could then provide a non-exhaustive list of some
techniques that would be deemed to satisfy the "more prominent"
criterion. Some of them might be detectable by a machine and some
not. The test suite can be flexible about measurement techniques.
.................David Marston