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

Re: test suite distinctions [was: Re: Feedback on "The Matrix"]

From: Mark Skall <skall@nist.gov>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 14:30:09 -0500
Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20020228142203.00a5e738@mailserver.nist.gov>
To: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>, Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Cc: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, www-qa@w3.org

>
>Personally, I doubt it is possible to produce such a checklist. My
>doubts are based on my inability to suggest such a checklist for test
>tools I am familiar with. They are too different in scope,
>functionality, and intended audience to be rated using common
>criteria.
>
>Your checklist is, essentially, a test. It is very difficult to agree
>on a common test for any given class of products. Agreeing on a common
>useful/objective/etc test for all test suites, validators, etc. would
>be a miracle!


I think of this checklist at a higher level - a meta level.  If this is a 
test, it's not a test of the technical  "goodness" of a test suite but more 
like a test to ensure that certain process steps were followed (e.g., is 
every feature tested, is there documented traceability from each test to a 
requirement in the recommendation, is there a test harness, etc.).

I believe it is not only possible to develop this checklist (test), but 
really quite straight-forward.
Received on Thursday, 28 February 2002 14:29:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 12:13:58 GMT