Re: Micropub test suite

Excellent.   Can you characterize which features have automated tests 
and which do not?     Is there anything boundary testing about them, 
testing the kind of thing someone might get wrong, or middle-of-the-road 
probably-everyone-will-pass tests?

      -- Sandro


On 03/06/2017 07:50 PM, Aaron Parecki wrote:
> We now have a client test suite for creating posts! Also the good news 
> is that the test suite passes itself, as demonstrated in the below video.
>
>
> This is live on the micropub.rocks website now! You can read more 
> about the details here:
>
> https://aaronparecki.com/2017/03/06/14/day-76-micropub-rocks-client-tests
>
>
>
>
> ----
> Aaron Parecki
> aaronparecki.com <http://aaronparecki.com>
> @aaronpk <http://twitter.com/aaronpk>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 8:11 AM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org 
> <mailto:sandro@w3.org>> wrote:
>
>     Apparently I wasn't paying enough attention at this point of the
>     meeting last week.  Sorry for not catching this.
>
>     To answer the question: I'm pretty sure we did not explicitly,
>     with full consideration, agree to relax our previous plan of
>     having complete test suites.  I see how that's implicit in the
>     decision we made, and I recall Aaron mentioning it, so maybe
>     everyone else thought it through, but in the mix of all the things
>     going on during that meeting, I didn't put 2+2 together.
>
>     I agree we should be consistent on this.   In general, I'd say
>     every constraint in the spec ought to have a few tests.   That's
>     not a constraint of W3C process though -- the WG is free to set a
>     different bar for interoperability and confirming implementations
>     -- but we probably do need to be rational and consistent in
>     setting that bar.
>
>     So, which way do we want to go on this?
>
>     And Aaron, how much of a burden would it be to finish that test
>     suite (or can we recruit someone else to do it?)
>
>         -- Sandro
>
>
>
>     On 03/06/2017 10:20 AM, Amy G wrote:
>>     Given the resolution about advancing Micropub to PR at the last
>>     meeting, did the working group decide that we don't need actually
>>     need complete test suites to progress to PR so long as there are
>>     reports? Does this also apply to LDN, WebSub and ActivityPub?
>>
>>     On 6 March 2017 at 23:05, Aaron Parecki <aaron@parecki.com
>>     <mailto:aaron@parecki.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Correct, I have a start to the client tests but I haven't
>>         launched it on the site yet. The implementation reports for
>>         clients are all self reported.
>>         On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:49 AM Amy G <amy@rhiaro.co.uk
>>         <mailto:amy@rhiaro.co.uk>> wrote:
>>
>>             Hola,
>>
>>             Just to confirm - there are no tests for Micropub clients
>>             right? You can only test a server implementation with the
>>             current test suite?
>>
>>             Amy
>>
>>
>
>