- From: Yves Savourel <yves@opentag.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 09:39:02 -0700
- To: "'Felix Sasaki'" <fsasaki@w3.org>, "'Lieske, Christian'" <christian.lieske@sap.com>
- Cc: <public-i18n-its@w3.org>
Hi Christian, Felix, all, To summarize Christian's 'General' section I think it has the following concepts: 1- We have a test suite 2- It's not a test suite to claim some kind of certification 3- it's in the form of input/out pairs 4- We recommend tools to have an option to produce such output so they can test Felix's proposed changes would be A) No need to have #2 because W3C does not do certification anyway B) No need for #4 because the WG has not a consensus in *recommending* this I would agree with A. I would mostly agree B: any choice of recommending, advising, or saying nothing about the fact that tools have to implement the test output format to test, is fine with me. I would also re-word what is left of the 'general' section. The 'specific' section looks fine too me. So we would have: ============ General: The ITS Working group provides a conformance test suite to help implementors to write applications that support the ITS specifications. The test suite provides pairs of input and output files here: <link to testsuite>. Specific: There are two cases of results of running the test suite: The implementation fails to pass the test suite. In this case it can be asserted that the implementation fails to meet the relevant ITS data category. The implementation passes the test suite. In this case all that can be asserted is that the implementation is conformant to that particular version of the ITS test suite. The output format is defined by the following DTD: <link to DTD> ============ Cheers, -yves
Received on Friday, 9 February 2007 16:39:16 UTC