W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > June 2002

Re: TEST: scope

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 14:03:28 +0200
To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: "webont" <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF0D1882B3.9484DED8-ONC1256BE4.0041AC40@agfa.be>

> I wished to write down my concerns about the scoping of the TEST work.
>
>
> Test suites have many different purposes:
> - checking correctness
>    - at particular points (issue driven)
>    - generally (conformance testing)
> - exercising difficult problems
> - performance testing
> - scale testing

regression tests etc

> Test suites have at least two different audiences:
> - systems and their developers
> - other humans
>
> The latter audience prefer small tests that can be easily understood.
> This audience may be reading the tests in order to better understand 
some text.
>
> =========================
>
>
> My view is that we need to be clear as to what we are trying to achieve.
>
> I suggest that we should generate tests that illustrate our issue 
resolutions.
> I suggest that we should keep all our tests as small as possible.

right, and they could be written in our (non-normative)
presentation syntaxes, also testing that as well...

> I suggest that we should not aim at a conformance test suite.

agreed, that is what different implementations should
take care of
 
> I suggest that performance and scalability tests (and the like) are out 
of
> scope.
>
> I think some of Ian's tests are
> - exercising difficult problems
> and
> - as small as they can be to illustrate the issue.
> (Modulo the OILedit => DAML+OIL conversion which appears a bit verbose!)
>
> As such I think I support them ...

agreed

-- ,
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Wednesday, 26 June 2002 08:04:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:50 GMT