- From: Jeanne Spellman <jeanne@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 11:58:33 -0400
- To: "Linss, Peter" <peter.linss@hp.com>
- CC: "<public-test-infra@w3.org>" <public-test-infra@w3.org>
Thanks for being so willing to help. The AUWG is now focusing on writing test cases, so a working test harness is a big help in conceptualizing how to design the manual tests and their instructions. Having the ability to separate the results by product, however is crucial, and I appreciate that you are willing to help find a solution. I'm sorry that this is considered a new twist, because it was included in the Requirements document during the charter approval process. I went looking for the requirement for testing authoring tools today, but couldn't find it in the current wiki page, but was able to find it in the history starting from 8 April 2011. The UAWG will also need this ability, as they will have to test media players, both standalone and embedded. Regards, jeanne On 5/31/2012 11:34 AM, Linss, Peter wrote: > On May 30, 2012, at 1:14 PM, Jeanne Spellman wrote: > >> I have been running some sample tests for ATAG and quickly realized that I have no way to save the results with the name of the authoring tool being tested. It looks to me as if the way I will have to use the test harness is to keep a separate spec-name/data for each product being testing and have the manifest file return to the same test suite location. >> >> Since I haven't worked with the submitted/approved directory structure yet, I don't know the impact of what you are proposing. >> >> I would like to ask your recommendations of the best way to manage testing different authoring tools both web-based and non-web-based (e.g. Wordpress, Blogger, Dreamweaver, InDesign, Word, Drupal, etc). We need the harness to present the instructions to the tester, record the results and produce pass/fail reports by authoring tool. >> >> > > Hi Jeanne, > > this is an interesting twist, the framework was designed for testing user agents, not authoring tools. It presumes a static test and multiple viewers. > > One way to handle this is to use the multiple format support of the framework, making one 'format' for each authoring tool. The framework then needs to get a per-suite switch to break out results by format instead of user agent. > > Let me give this some more thought on how best to handle it… > > Peter -- _______________________________ Jeanne Spellman W3C Web Accessibility Initiative jeanne@w3.org
Received on Friday, 1 June 2012 15:58:36 UTC