- From: Linss, Peter <peter.linss@hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 17:31:04 +0000
- To: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- CC: Bryan Sullivan <blsaws@gmail.com>, "public-test-infra@w3.org" <public-test-infra@w3.org>
The physical relocation is a carry over from before we had Shepherd. Now we can track approval status without moving the files (although Shepherd does understand the relocation and will automatically reset the approval status if files get moved around). Peter On Feb 1, 2012, at 2:46 AM, Richard Ishida wrote: > I'd like to see an approval system that doesn't rely on physically > relocating the test files, since in the i18n case the test files are > produced by a call to a PHP file, and so cannot be moved into different > directories. (Creating the tests in a PHP file makes life *much* easier > for us when creating and modifying tests and test metadata.) > > RI > > > On 01/02/2012 00:01, Linss, Peter 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 >>> >> >> >> > > -- > Richard Ishida > Internationalization Activity Lead > W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) > > http://www.w3.org/International/ > http://rishida.net/
Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2012 17:32:30 UTC