- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:34:04 -0800
- To: James Hopkins <james@idreamincode.co.uk>
- CC: public-css-testsuite@w3.org
James Hopkins wrote: >> >> If the goal of this META is to aid the test's reviewer, then I think just >> including an "if" clause in the assert should be sufficient. >> "If the UA does this, then it must do that." > > The reason that I suggested this addition, was because there's nothing > currently on http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/format (or any of the > other test authoring documents), that deal with the issue of describing > optionality in the context of my example. My proposal deals with this > issue without 'busying' the assert, as it is a separate mechanism > entirely. However, if you're not willing to accept my proposal, then may > I suggest a change to the assert description at > http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/format, which would mention the use of > the assert to describe optional behavior? I've added # If the assertion is only valid in certain cases, those conditions # should be described in the statement. Is that ok? ~fantasai
Received on Saturday, 12 December 2009 00:34:41 UTC