- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 23:53:32 +0200
- To: Leroy Finn <finnle@tcd.ie>
- Cc: Dominic Jones <Dominic.Jones@scss.tcd.ie>, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>, Multilingual Web LT-TESTS Public <public-multilingualweb-lt-tests@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAL58czrpxB7ub2Xxb+GC2dOPQyxo=hfngs5d_nB=ntpUZ4bQcw@mail.gmail.com>
Great, thanks for the info, Leroy. Best, Felix 2012/10/24 Leroy Finn <finnle@tcd.ie> > Hey Felix, > > Yeah i do have a script that does it to all the files in this manner. If > you and Yves think alphabetical is best then i will change the output > to reflect this but currently i am reading through the new draft and > getting the new test files up on the site. After the Lyon meeting I will > update the output to alphabetical as i am producing new output anyway for > the new files. > > Thanks, > Leroy > > > On 24 October 2012 22:07, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> wrote: > >> Hi Leroy, all, >> >> having a batch file to re-produce the output can indeed save a lot of >> time. For ITS 1.0 we used such a setup, based on a "master file" >> http://www.w3.org/International/its/tests/input-file-list.xml >> that generates the HTML overview document >> http://www.w3.org/International/its/tests/ >> and the expected results. So if there is a change in the results format >> it is just one click, no manual work at all. Maybe we could switch to such >> an approach? >> >> Best, >> >> Felix >> >> >> >> >> 2012/10/24 Leroy Finn <finnle@tcd.ie> >> >>> I agree Dom and Yves that we should discuss it in Lyon so that everyone >>> knows. Also I have one or two others to add to that discussion in Lyon >>> before i reproduce the output :) >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Leroy >>> >>> >>> On 24 October 2012 14:13, Dominic Jones <Dominic.Jones@scss.tcd.ie>wrote: >>> >>>> Cool, will add this for discussion during the test-suite session. >>>> >>>> Dom >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Dominic Jones | Research Assistant >>>> KDEG, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 24 Oct 2012, at 14:04, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> > Hi Dom, >>>> > >>>> > Sure. While we work out the issues, there is probably no need for the >>>> Web site to be always up-to-date. A link to Github would make clear to any >>>> potential implementers where to get the files. >>>> > >>>> > There are probably ways to update the Web site automatically, or at >>>> least partially automatically. If only the content of a file changes, one >>>> should be able to just update it from Github. We do that with batch files >>>> in our development tree. Anyways, maybe something to talk about in Lyon. >>>> > >>>> > Cheers, >>>> > -yves >>>> > >>>> > -----Original Message----- >>>> > From: Dominic Jones [mailto:Dominic.Jones@scss.tcd.ie] >>>> > Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 6:54 AM >>>> > To: Yves Savourel >>>> > Cc: 'Multilingual Web LT-TESTS Public' >>>> > Subject: Re: Test suite specs >>>> > >>>> > Hi Yves. >>>> > >>>> > There is an additional problem in that every time we make a change to >>>> the output or input files we spend a great deal of time updating the >>>> website with new links. We're dealing with 100+ files now… So I'd like to >>>> discuss the below during Lyon next week, and agree on the exact format they >>>> / we would like to see, so that we're not spending an excess of time >>>> re-generating output files of their file names as the target moves. One >>>> solution to this is that we just use github for the collection of input and >>>> output files, making the website redundant, until we're sure that the >>>> creases have been iron out in exactly how we want the output to be formed. >>>> Its much easier to just update GitHub than it is to update the website. >>>> > >>>> > Are you happy to spend some time next week discussing this, leaving >>>> this thread open until then? >>>> > >>>> > Hope that makes sense. >>>> > >>>> > Dom >>>> > -- >>>> > Dominic Jones | Research Assistant >>>> > KDEG, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On 24 Oct 2012, at 12:47, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com> wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> Hi Leroy, all, >>>> >> >>>> >> I would tend to disagree :) >>>> >> >>>> >> Those files are test results that are going to be (and are already >>>> in our case) used in unit tests in the builds of some production-grade >>>> applications. They simply must be predictable and consistent. Not all >>>> comparison tool can deal with different ordering of the lines for example, >>>> or present/absent white spaces. >>>> >> >>>> >> The only way to have a predictable line order is to sort the >>>> attributes alphabetically. So I think we should do that. >>>> >> >>>> >> For the trailing whitespace, it’s doesn’t matter if they are there >>>> or not, but they need to be either always there or never. >>>> >> >>>> >> We could update the files to reflect that, but it is more efficient >>>> in the long run to make sure the process you are using to generate them >>>> does it by itself. >>>> >> >>>> >> Cheers, >>>> >> -yves >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> From: Leroy Finn [mailto:finnle@tcd.ie] >>>> >> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 3:08 AM >>>> >> To: Fredrik Liden >>>> >> Cc: Multilingual Web LT-TESTS Public >>>> >> Subject: Re: Test suite specs >>>> >> >>>> >> The alphabetical order is not a major problem for my comparison >>>> engine once the output lines in the actual files are correct. You can >>>> include them if you want its no big deal if you don't want the trailing tab >>>> and empty line at the end. The main thing is that the output lines are >>>> correct and the ordering is not that important. >>>> >> >>>> >> Thanks, >>>> >> Leroy >>>> >> >>>> >> On 23 October 2012 21:36, Fredrik Liden <fliden@enlaso.com> wrote: >>>> >> Hi Leroy, >>>> >> >>>> >> Thanks for adding me. >>>> >> >>>> >> In example 6 and 7 there is an instance of >>>> >> >>>> >> <item type="title" its:translate="yes"> >>>> >> >>>> >> The test suite result is: >>>> >> /doc/info[1]/item[1] its:translate="yes" >>>> >> /doc/info[1]/item[1]/@type its:translate="no" >>>> >> /doc/info[1]/item[1]/@its:translate its:translate="no" >>>> >> >>>> >> Is this correct or should the attributes in alphabetical order? I >>>> think there might be instances in some other categories as well. >>>> >> /doc/info[1]/item[1] its:translate="yes" >>>> >> /doc/info[1]/item[1]/@its:translate its:translate="no" >>>> >> /doc/info[1]/item[1]/@type its:translate="no" >>>> >> >>>> >> An email from 8/31 that mentions alphabetical order since the xml >>>> parsers do not guarantee attribute order. >>>> >> >>>> >> Btw, I noticed each line in the test files ends with \t\r\n. (Tab >>>> and Linebreak), I wonder if the trailing \t should be there. There’s also >>>> a trailing empty row at the end of each result file, should we include that? >>>> >> >>>> >> Just in case we need to update our current test result engine so the >>>> file comparison test passes. >>>> >> >>>> >> Cheers, >>>> >> Fredrik >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Felix Sasaki >> DFKI / W3C Fellow >> >> > -- Felix Sasaki DFKI / W3C Fellow
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2012 21:53:56 UTC