- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:17:35 +0200
- To: "Lofton Henderson" <lofton@rockynet.com>, David_Marston@lotus.com
- Cc: www-qa@w3.org
At 13:15 -0600 2001-10-20, Lofton Henderson wrote:
>Until the spec is corrected with an erratum, the test suite should
>not attempt to impose an interpretation. Nothing short of a
>consensus erratum process addresses this problem definitively.
It's why the test cases should be built by the WG or by an external
resource WITH the WG at the earliest stage of a REC (I mean WD). Test
cases are useful tools for developpers, but there are also an easier
way to write a clear and unambiguous recommendation.
At the QA Workshop, I remember Thierry Kormann, a developper of ILOG
involved in the Batik Project (SVG Browser), that we should not have
words like "free to implementation" for a feature or the value of an
attribute. Test cases could help to fix that type of mistakes, or
wording in specifications. It will help also to create good test
assertions.
Test suite for developpers, but also for the WG. Earlier test cases
will be built by the WG, less difficulties and ambiguities will have
to be fixed in the future.
--
Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager
http://www.w3.org/QA/
--- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---
Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2001 05:27:09 UTC