- From: Angel Machín <angel.machin@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 19:05:54 +0100
- To: Doug Turner <doug.turner@gmail.com>
- Cc: Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com>, Matt Womer <mdw@w3.org>, "public-geolocation@w3.org" <public-geolocation@w3.org>
Hi Doug, Andrei, What follows is a repost about the format of tests ..... Regarding the format... I have found this interesting document proposing the format and the way of performing the whole testing process: http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2005/01/test-faq >From this document.... a good test is: - Mappable to the specification (you must know what portion of the specification it tests) - Atomic (tests a single feature rather than multiple features) - Self-documenting (explains what it is testing and what output it expects) - Focused on the technology under test rather than on ancillary technologies - Correct According to this guidelines, I think the optimal format could be a HTML+JavaScript file containing a single test case. This web page should contain an explanation of what is being tested and the expected output of the JS code when executed within the browser. There are a lot of complete test suites from other W3C specs that can be checked, SVG tests could be a good example of what we could deliver: http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/Group/repository/testsuite/1.1/htmlEmbedHarness/ So, I think it is worth defining a common format and a single repository for these tests, do you agree? any opinion about this? Cheers, Angel
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2009 18:06:35 UTC