david_marston@us.ibm.com wrote:
Dan Connolly wrote:
  
...How much of the wheel have we reinvented?
    

From the point of view of the OASIS test case management system used
for XSLT, not too much. At a quick glance, I think the two are
compatible.

From the point of view of QAWG guidelines, I see a problem in the
result table where you report that a product has passed 100% of the
test cases for each group. The string "No failures found" would be
more appropriate. The issues about percentages include:
1. Implication that the current suite is 100% of all the tests that
   should be there. Test suites that are being expanded frequently
   won't have a stable notion of 100%.
Isn't there a more fundamental problem? Test suites should be versioned. It ought to be OK to state "I passed x% of the test cases for version y.z of the test suite." The number of test cases in any particular version of the test suite should be, of course, fixed.
2. Implication that high numbers under 100% are pretty good. Each
   class of product may have its own notion of how seriously interop
   has been hurt by a score of, say, 96%.
3. Implication that all tests count equally. Product X's 96% might
   be much worse than Product Y's 96%, depending on the cases that
   comprise the failing 4% on each.
.................David Marston
Right. Attempting to interpret any claim other than "I passed all the tests" is a dangerous business. It can have value for the implementors, and help them to figure out where they need to improve, but should not be used to compare one implementation with another...