Re: Getting started on the Documentation Practices task force

Thanks, Peter. I will reference that material.

A couple of questions:

I saw in the Regions spec that class="assert must" is used in a few
places but not many. Other than that I had a hard time seeing any
specific references to test assertions or tagging of specific
paragraphs with IDs etc as mentioned in "Each of the Regions tests
will have metadata that points back one or more ids used in the
Regions spec. These ids may be heading or dfn elements, or they may be
ids added at the paragraph or sentence level to indicate a specific
conformance requirement that must be tested. We should be able to scan
the spec for ids (ignoring non-testable ids) and find at least one
test for every testable id in the spec."
(http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css3-regions#spec-and-test-metadata). How
do I know that an ID is testable or scan to determine as noted?

Are there specific examples (other than the class attribute above)
that you can point to of assertion markup in the CSS specs? Or is the
current practice to reference section IDs in the test specs (which is
what I would call a reverse reference approach, rather than deciding
up front in the spec what is intended to be testable and providing a
specific assertion tag to it).

Thanks for your help.

On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Linss, Peter <peter.linss@hp.com> wrote:
> The CSS WG has a bunch of documentation about our test review process at:
> http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/review
>
> Note that this was written before we had our test suite management system online at:
> http://test.csswg.org/shepherd
>
> Test assertions as part of a spec here:
> http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css3-regions#spec-and-test-metadata
>
> Peter
>
> On Jan 31, 2012, at 3:14 PM, Bryan Sullivan wrote:
>
>> Oops, gotta love Gmail.
>>
>> Anyway I was going to continue, that if anyone has input on those
>> objectives please chime in on this list, and help me develop the set
>> of info that will help us determine consensus etc. I know there is
>> some useful prior work and current practices that will also be
>> referenced, and some analysis done on the pros/cons of them might be
>> useful. But first spreading the word about how groups go about
>> developing test assertions and test documentation/assets, and what
>> methods might be useful to consider for groups who don't have a
>> specific method for these, is the first step.
>>
>> In addition to the page noted below, some initial data is provided at
>> http://www.w3.org/wiki/Testing/Assertions. This is a rough first pass
>> and incomplete, purely in the data collection phase of this.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bryan Sullivan
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Bryan Sullivan <blsaws@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> To get the ball rolling on the "Documentation Practices" task force of
>>> the Web Testing Interest Group, that I agreed to lead during TPAC, I
>>> have created a set of wiki pages where the work in progress of the TF
>>> can be collected. As noted on the wiki page
>>> (http://www.w3.org/wiki/Testing/Documentation_Practices), the goal of
>>> this task force is to:
>>> * determine the current practices for
>>>        developing test assertions as part of W3C specs
>>>        processes to review and approve tests
>>>    broadening consensus on the above
>>>    promoting adoption of the consensus approach
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks,
>>> Bryan Sullivan
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thanks,
>> Bryan Sullivan
>>
>



-- 
Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan

Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2012 02:40:03 UTC