- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 18:19:00 -0600
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Thanks a bunch for publishing/contributing test materials, Adrian... On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 10:44 -0800, L. David Baron wrote: > On Wednesday 2009-01-28 09:27 -0800, Adrian Bateman wrote: > > At a certain point, though, we will need to decide that certain > > tests are "done" and should not be modified. > > No, the spec is normative, and the tests are not, so if tests are > found to be incorrect, they should be fixed. Since lots of developers will use the tests without reading the spec, I prefer to have both the spec and the tests be normative. If they conflict, there's a bug, and I don't see much value in pre-judging where the bug is. > (That said, there may be cases where it would be desirable to change > the spec if the test caused interoperable behavior that disagreed > with the spec but was not actually a problem. However, that would > need to be done through a decision to change the spec.) > > -David > -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Thursday, 29 January 2009 00:19:15 UTC