Re: Documentation update

On 1/16/12 11:24 AM, "Linss, Peter" <peter.linss@hp.com> wrote:

> On Jan 16, 2012, at 7:28 AM, Robin Berjon wrote:
> 
>> On Jan 11, 2012, at 17:38 , Linss, Peter wrote:
>> 
>>> the assertion should not be the name of the test, but rather a list of the
>>> assertions in the specification tested.
>>> Also, a planned augmentation is to allow the spec links to point to any
>>> anchor in the spec to allow narrower targeting of testable assertions. this
>>> will go hand in hand with additional markup in the spec to identify those
>>> assertions in an automated way.
>> 
>> Yes, I was thinking about markup as used in the test meth document. I'm
>> guessing that instead of assertions there could be assertion-links (or we
>> could overload and guess).
> 
> Fantasai and Alan Stearns have had a long discussion about how best to markup
> specs in a manner that testable assertions can be found by automated tools.
> I'm not sure if what they came up with has been documented anywhere yet.

I wrote down what we're planning on doing for CSS Regions tests on the spec
wiki page:

http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css3-regions#spec-and-test-metadata

The main idea is that tests can link to any anchor in the spec, and
non-testable anchors will get a new "informative" class attribute. Then the
spec can be scanned for all non-informative anchors to discover whether
there are corresponding tests.

Thanks,

Alan

Received on Monday, 16 January 2012 19:43:25 UTC