- From: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:18:44 +0100
- To: Dmitri Silaev <Dmitri.Silaev@Sun.COM>
- CC: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, public-mwts@w3.org, Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>
Dmitri Silaev wrote: > Hi Dom, > > Here is my comments for "Extracting Test Assertions from a > Specification" document. The document looks very good. I have only minor > comments. > > I. "3. Mark-up conventions for test assertions" > > "Each assertion is uniquely identified through the id attribute on the > paragraph element; the unique identifier starts by convention with ta-, > and its uniqueness is ensured by the HTML validity requirements of the > document." > > Is it useful to explain the best practice how to get the assertion the > unique assertion id? For example, "its uniqueness generated randomly is > ensured..." It saves reader from solving the riddle what "RRZxvvTFHx" > means. Agreed. We need to change this to just use one or two characters or a number; Something easy to use... assigning the long random string was a big mistake on my part, which caused a few headaches. In the Widget Interface spec, I've been working with short identifiers: just two letters. This makes life a lot easier. > II. "4. Extracting automatically test assertions" > > "The original extraction of test assertions was made through an XSLT > style sheet, that allowed to generate a static list of test assertions > that served as the first basis for the review of the testability of the > specification." > > I believe it need to be explained where the extraction was made, e.g. > "When "Widgets Packaging and Configuration" specification was marked up > by convention said before, the original extraction of test assertions > was made through an XSLT style sheet,..." I'll just note that the only reason we didn't end up using it in the end was just a matter of preference (I personally don't know XSLT and get very confused every time I try to use it. Coming from front-end web dev, I'm more at home with CSS Selectors which is the reason why we remade the extraction using JQuery... actually, I believe my original version of the extraction tool used the Selectors API ). > III. "5. Test assertions and test cases" > > "To maintain the association between test cases and test assertions, a > simple XML file was set up: > <EXAMPLE>" > > It seems the example should match to marked assertion in "3. Mark-up > conventions for test assertions". It simplifies the understanding of the > document. > > VI. "5. Test assertions and test cases" > > "its content is integrated in the test plan with JavaScript to attach > test cases to the previously extracted test assertions;" > > It may be useful to add link to [WIDGETS-TESTS] one more time here. > > V. I've found strange symbols in document: "—", ... It may be not a > problem in final document, but now it made a little difficulties to read > document for me. I've used "download" link from cvs page: > http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2008/dev-ind-testing/extracting-test-assertions-pub.html?rev=1.1&content-type=text/html;%20charset=iso-8859-1 > > > > Thanks, > Dmitri. > > > On Dec 10, 2009, at 12:53 PM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote: > >> Le mardi 08 décembre 2009 à 11:09 +0100, Dominique Hazael-Massieux a >> écrit : >>> Here is (attached) what the document would like once made publication >>> rules-ready. >> >> Based on Marcos’ kind offer to take an editing pass at the document, >> I’ve put in CVS at: >> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2008/dev-ind-testing/extracting-test-assertions-pub.html >> >> >> Dom >> >> >> >
Received on Monday, 14 December 2009 17:19:21 UTC