Re: Concept about non-mandatory tests

Hilarious...  You can see an example at
http://pandora.aptest.com/specops/test-results/annotation-model/all.html

I ran tests in "SM01" against a patched version.

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:

>
> On 14 Sep 2016, at 17:27, Shane McCarron <shane@spec-ops.io> wrote:
>
> I just had a thought.  I know that we have the fail and skip option (and
> pass and skip) but it is a problem for nested tests.  I might even know why
> it is a problem.
>
> But instead of adding weird flow control, what if we just dont "run" tests
> that are should or may tests and they don't pass.  Just don't run the
> assertion at all.  The code actually does the "test" of the assertion
> before it calls the WPT "test" function.  We can just not call that
> function at all if it is a SHOULD or MAY test and it doesn't match the
> success criteria.  I think this would just result in "yellow" cells on the
> report for options that are not supported.
>
>
> Visually, if this works, it looks perfect. Red is scary:-)
>
> Ivan
>
> What do people think?
>
> --
> Shane McCarron
> Projects Manager, Spec-Ops
>
>
>
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C
> Digital Publishing Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Shane McCarron
Projects Manager, Spec-Ops