- From: Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 15:52:50 +0000
- To: "SULLIVAN, BRYAN L" <bs3131@att.com>, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- CC: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, "public-coremob@w3.org" <public-coremob@w3.org>
On 1/23/13 4:21 PM, "SULLIVAN, BRYAN L" <bs3131@att.com> wrote: >I figured someone would have already done a similar analysis, but didn't >know where to look. That's why I went ahead and put this on the wiki. > >I think we should develop automated updates to such an analysis, but >publish a periodic (monthly or quarterly) report in the meantime. I am >willing to help drive that effort. > >The "done-ness" of tests is a key question. As I did the analysis, I had >to take various kinds of generalizing and summarizing actions that roll >up the single numbers, and I know for sure that the value of the single >numbers is low until we understand and validate what contributes to them. >With so much variance in what's placed where and how it's identified in >the lifecycle of tests, I found it very difficult to get more than a >thumbnail sketch of the numbers. At least the ones with "0" were easier, >if an unwelcome discovery! > >I think useful short-term actions are to: > >1) take a closer look at each suite, talk to the champion/contributors, >and document their practice > >2) break out the test numbers in terms of the lifecycle stage e.g. >a) submitted (note that it's unclear where tests of different authors may >be duplicates) >b) approved (meaning hopefully something consistent, e.g. reviewed and >validated through execution with at least one UA, but optimally all major >UAs, at least to validate that no test design errors are causing test >failure with any UA) >c) active (meaning the tests have been incorporated into the test >framework > >3) Add numbers indicating the nature of the tester experience: >a) manual tests >b) automated tests > >All of this is focused on aligning processes, identifying where resources >are needed, and generally providing a more useful guide to what tests are >available and in what form. > >Thanks, >Bryan Sullivan Thanks for your ongoing thought on this matter, Bryan. Shared mine online recently[1]. This might be of interest to you. Best, --tobie [1]: http://tobie.github.com/w3c-testing-plan/unofficial-w3c-testing-plan-201201 16.html
Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2013 15:53:19 UTC