Re: Agenda, December 20 2012, SVG WG telcon

On Dec 19, 2012, at 4:54 PM, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> wrote:

> On 20/12/12 11:50 AM, Dirk Schulze wrote:
>>> Would we be able to talk briefly about the test suite?  I would like to
>>> form a plan of attack for, at least, migrating the SVG 1.1 test suite to
>>> the new repository, because it's probably not going to happen by itself.
>> 
>> Not sure if we should do that. The SVG 1.1 test suite is not compatible with the requirements of the new test suite (ref tests or js tests)
> 
> Maybe instead of "migrate" I should have said "port".  Unless you think 
> we need to write completely new tests because there is something about 
> how the current ones are formulated that isn't compatible (aside from 
> the metadata/structure)?

The ref tests strategy does not work very well for animation tests. Basic daring operations are harder to mimic. But in general, I think it means we need to rewrite a bunch of tests :/

> 
>>> :)  Also, I was asked recently if we have a place to put testharness.js
>>> tests as somebody was going to contribute a couple.  We don't think we
>>> have any yet -- where in the svg2-tests repo should we put them?
>>> 
>> 
>> There should not be any need for a special hierarchy. Just do the same as for the ref tests. Shepherd or the created test suite should add the required libraries on there own.
> 
> Does testharness.js run under Shepherd?  I had the impression that it 
> was a separate thing.

As far as I know, it is able to manage these tests. The test suite itself should have support for Testharness.js tests. Test suite and Shepherd are two different things in the CSS WG.

Greetings,
Dirk

Received on Thursday, 20 December 2012 01:02:30 UTC