Re: Testing SHOULD

Arron Eicholz wrote:
> fantasai wrote:
>> Ok, I'm adding two flags to the list:
>> rec
>>    Behavior tested is RECOMMENDED, but not REQUIRED. [RFC2119]
>> optional
>>    Behavior tested is preferred but OPTIONAL. [RFC2119] (These tests
>>    must be reviewed by a test suite owner or peer.)
>> I shortened 'recommended' to 'rec' in the interests of
>>    a) keeping it short
>>    b) avoiding spelling mistakes :)
>> 'Optional' should be added only if the behavior tested is the preferred
>> behavior: we don't want to encourage implementors to pass tests on
>> discouraged behavior. (If there's a case where neither behavior is
>> preferred,
>> then both behaviors should be tested.) These tests require test suite
>> Owner/Peer review because which behavior is preferred is not always
>> obvious.
>> Does that sound reasonable? (Arron?)
> Yes this makes sense to me. Just to clarify though do SHOULD rules fall
> into the OPTIONAL category?


> There are 10 keywords that are 'recommended' for use when describing
> information in the spec do we plan on adding flags for any additional
> keywords?


> What is the exact mapping?

Defined by RFC2119.

> I think the first five (MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT) do
> not need flags.


> The remaining ones I think do but I am unsure if we want to map all of
> the remaining ones to the flag 'optional'. Technically all of the
> remaining five keywords are optional for user agents. There is nothing
> saying they have to follow the recommended solution though it is probably
> in their best interest to do so.
> So I am left with this...
> Personally I think SHOULD, SHOULD NOT, and RECOMMENDED are closely
> related and should all map to the same flag. I do not think 'rec' is
> the right flag for this since it can easily be confused to mean a W3C
> REC (Recommendation) status just like David stated. I would suggest
> the flag 'preferred'. The only problem I see with that flag is people
> will misspell it but that is true with almost any flag.
> The MAY and OPTIONAL keywords, I think the flag 'optional' is fine for
> these. I don't see a need to separate those into separate flags.

The mapping is given in RFC2119


As David suggested, I added the flags 'should' and 'may' to the list.
The default (no flag) means it's required.


Received on Saturday, 3 May 2008 19:03:13 UTC