- From: Dmitri Silaev <Dmitri.Silaev@Sun.COM>
- Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:15:51 +0300
- To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Cc: public-mwts@w3.org, marcosc <marcosc@opera.com>, Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>
Hi Dom, Please see my comment below. On Dec 15, 2009, at 4:52 PM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote: > Hi Dmitri, > > Le lundi 14 décembre 2009 à 19:58 +0300, Dmitri Silaev a écrit : >> Here is my comments for "Extracting Test Assertions from a >> Specification" document. > > Thanks very much for your comments; my responses embedded below. > http://dev.w3.org/2008/dev-ind-testing/extracting-test-assertions-pub.html > >> 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. > > I clarified that by mentioning the strings were randomly generated, > and > that their length wasn’t exactly a feature :) > >> 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’ve tried to clarify that, but I’m not sure if it addresses your > comment: > When the specification was initially marked up using the > conventions described above, the 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. > It is ok, but may be "Widgets Packaging and Configuration" should be mentioned in second paragraph: "In the course of the co-development of the test suite and the Widgets Packaging and Configuration specification,..." or "In the course of the co-development of the Widgets Packaging and Configuration specification and the test suite, ..." It indicates that this and following sentences in the chapter are concrete example: reader's just read about Widgets Packaging and Configuration specification three sentences before and he or she don't need to recall what group and spec writers worked together (mentioned in the introduction). I believe the style is not become worse in this case because "Widgets Packaging and Configuration" is not occurred in chapter 4. Thanks, Dmitri. >> 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. > > Very good point, indeed; I have re-used the same id. > >> 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. > > Added. > >> 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 > > Yeah, that’s an artefact of the CVS server, nothing to worry about. > > Dom > >
Received on Wednesday, 16 December 2009 10:17:26 UTC