- From: Pierre-Antoine <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>
- Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:10:49 +0100
- To: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 9 March 2010 13:11:32 UTC
As per ACTION 208, I read the Test Methodology document [1] in order to see how it can be apply by the WG for designing our test cases. My conclusion is that the document is not really applicable in our case. The document is mainly oriented to specification defining conformance requirements using natural language (with standard verbs such as MUST, SHOULD, MAY... as typically defined by [2]), aiming at annotating them in order to check them and turn them into operational test cases. In our case, conformance is mainly defined by the mapping tables, which are already quite format and don't need, IMHO, futher annotation or formalization. I also note that our document do not refer to [2], which seems to confirm the inadequacy of the test-methodology document. pa [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/test-methodology/ [2] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt
Received on Tuesday, 9 March 2010 13:11:32 UTC