- From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 09:55:41 +0100
- To: Kris Krueger <krisk@microsoft.com>
- CC: "'public-html-testsuite@w3.org'" <public-html-testsuite@w3.org>
On 06/02/2013 23:36 , Kris Krueger wrote: > We've discussed adding meta-data to the list a few times....each time > we have decided this was not a good option to pursue. To what list? Do you have pointers to the arguments? I can't seem to find them in the archives. > I'd suggest that we have a text file (format/file type is not a > concern of mine) that holds this 'meta data' and other metadata (for > example test is approved). I would really rather not. Metadata capture should be designed in such a way that it ensures in as much as possible that it won't go out of date. External authoritative metadata such as in a text file is guaranteed to break. That's why I proposed inlining it (in the most lightweight manner I could think of). Another option is to capture that in file names (if there's ".manual." in the file name, then it's manual). Finally, we don't need metadata to mark a test as approved. Anything that's in the suite is approved since submissions are in pull requests. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2013 08:57:01 UTC