W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > June 2013

Re: Linking test suites to specs

From: Rebecca Hauck <rhauck@adobe.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 10:52:38 -0700
To: Peter Linss <peter.linss@hp.com>
CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CDF30D10.33662%rhauck@adobe.com>

On 6/27/13 6:29 PM, "Peter Linss" <peter.linss@hp.com> wrote:

>On Jun 27, 2013, at 3:15 PM, Rebecca Hauck wrote:
>> On 6/27/13 2:40 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Rebecca Hauck <rhauck@adobe.com>
>>>> This never made it on to the already full agenda of yesterday's
>>>> &
>>>> I'm not even sure it requires that precious time.  If no one objects
>>>> me
>>>> making this proposed change to the spec header, I'll proceed
>>>> (approximately
>>>> this time tomorrow).
>>>> To reiterate, the changes I'll be making are:
>>>> Add the Test Suite section to all of the specs  those with no tests
>>>> labeled
>>>> "none yet"
>>>> Link to the test suite cover page per fantasai's suggestion
>>> What'll the markup look like?  Either a "none yet" string, or a link
>>> to the test suite cover page?  What text should the link contain -
>>> just the link itself, or something else?
>> Yes, either "none yet" or a link to the cover page. For example:
>> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css3-flexbox/nightly-unstable

>> And just the link is fine.
>> However, these test suite links have versions in them - is that going to
>> be problematic? Input from Peter is welcome here as I'm not super
>> (yet) with these things are built and labeled.
>The 'nightly-unstable' suites are simply the result of the nightly build
>and contain whatever was present in the repository at the time.
>The dated test suites are snapshots capturing a specific state of the
>test suite, generally the copy that was used to meet the CR exit criteria
>of the spec and are saved for posterity's sake (and are linked from the
>CR implementation reports).
>For some suites, like CSS2.1, we had a number of 'Release Candidate'
>snapshots prior to exiting CR. Mostly those are from before we had
>nightly builds, but also, due to the size of the suite, we had a lot of
>submissions from people running the suites outside the harness and
>submitting implementation reports. The snapshots were a way for the
>implementation reports to be linked to the versions of the tests (the
>harness tracks results per test revision).
>Given that once we exit CR the goal of the test suite shifts from spec
>testing to conformance testing, it's probably best for specs to always
>point to the nightly build.

Ok, then that's the link, Tab.  Let me know if there's anything else I
need to do (or avoid) for this.

Received on Friday, 28 June 2013 17:52:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 20 January 2023 19:58:19 UTC