W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa@w3.org > March 2004

Re: Test suite validity

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:25:39 +0000
Message-ID: <4051E483.2030906@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Mary Brady <mbrady@nist.gov>
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, www-qa@w3.org, www-dom-ts@w3.org, Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>, dom@w3.org, wchang@nist.gov, tmichel@w3.org, mary.brady@nist.gov, bradp@microsoft.com

Mary Brady wrote:

> Many of the complexities of the test harness stem from dealing with other
> technologies, and how each implementation deals with
> them.

I felt that Ian's talk over-emphasized testing just one technology at a 
time. If the problems occur in using two or three technologies or two or 
three specifications together then test suites should cover those cases. 
This is particularly important where it is not clear which spec covers the 
area since we can get implementorA saying "reading spec A we do it this 
way", and implementorB sayig "reading spec B we do it this other way".

I think a test case is a good way of banging the heads of WG-A and WG-B 

(While I have phrased this in my issue-driven mindset, I think the point is 
good for conformance testing too - the goal is interoperable 
implementations in that case)

Received on Friday, 12 March 2004 11:26:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:40:35 UTC