- From: Mark W. Skall <mark.skall@nist.gov>
- Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 13:51:05 -0500
- To: <dom@w3.org>, <www-qa@w3.org>
This goes back to the argument about whether all requirements should be testable. I believe that If you can't figure out a way to test a requirement, it should not be included in the specification. Others disagree. If you buy into my argument, there is a contradiction. Otherwise there is not. In any case, a cost analysis of non testable requirements would be very difficult, if not impossible. Mark -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld -----Original Message----- From: www-qa-request@w3.org <www-qa-request@w3.org> To: www-qa@w3.org <www-qa@w3.org> Sent: Tue Dec 20 12:22:17 2005 Subject: Testability and normative requirements Hello QA IG, Is there a logical contradiction behind the idea of a normative requirement that would not be testable? I don't think there is, but would be interested to hear what others think about it. More generally, if the IG could produce some kind of finding on the relationships between testability and "normativity" (e.g. with the costs of having non-testable normative requirements), I would find it very useful. The Wiki could probably host it... Thanks, Dom -- Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/ W3C/ERCIM mailto:dom@w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 20 December 2005 18:51:26 UTC