- From: Benjamin Schaaf <ben.schaaf@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 16:41:55 +1100
- To: Philip Jägenstedt <foolip@google.com>
- Cc: public-test-infra@w3.org, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
For the file-parser tests its currently one test per vtt file, and any assertions are either in the vtt file (as attributes for a `VTTCue` object, eg: `{"line":0}`) or in cue-counts.json (which just assets that a specific number of cues were parsed). That doesn't easily expand into tests for stylesheet or VTTRegion parsing. On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Philip Jägenstedt <foolip@google.com> wrote: > Perhaps a PR converting one test would make it easier to judge what this > would amount to. I guess that a problem with the current tests is that the > assertions are completely separate from the VTT file itself, but one benefit > is that the same VTT file can be shared among multiple tests. > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 6:33 AM Benjamin Schaaf <ben.schaaf@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> I would change it to a format that includes both a vtt file and some >> js out of which I can generate a test that adds the vtt file as a >> track to a video element and passed the track and video to the js (and >> run it). >> That means I can write arbitrary assertions alongside the vtt file. >> >> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:22 PM, Philip Jägenstedt <foolip@google.com> >> wrote: >> > Can you elaborate on how you'd change the parser tests? That seems like >> > the >> > only significant change. CC Simon in case he already replied about this >> > before this was forwarded to the list. >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 2:43 PM Benjamin Schaaf <ben.schaaf@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> >> From: Benjamin Schaaf <ben.schaaf@gmail.com> >> >> Date: Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 12:48 PM >> >> Subject: Test Changes Proposal >> >> To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, >> >> Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> >> >> >> >> >> >> Hello, >> >> >> >> I've put together a proposal for a way to reorganise webvtt's >> >> web-platform-tests to make writing and reading tests easier as well as >> >> add categorization. >> >> I'd like to get input on this before I start working on it. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Benjamin Schaaf >> >> >> >> >> >> # WebVTT web-platform-tests changes proposal >> >> >> >> A lot of the way tests are currently set up is limited in some manner, >> >> eg. >> >> `webvtt-file-parsing tests` can only check direct attributes of webvtt >> >> cues and >> >> the number of cues generated. Instead of building on top of the current >> >> tests, >> >> I'd like to rewrite the way the current tests are run so we can more >> >> easily >> >> write tests. >> >> >> >> For `webvtt-file-parsing` I'd like to generate tests from a template >> >> that >> >> includes a wevtt file and some js assertions given the video object. >> >> >> >> For `webvtt-cue-text-parsing-rules` I'd like to change the format to be >> >> more >> >> easily readable and clean up buildtests.py (or rewrite). >> >> >> >> I think the api tests are generally fine as they are (in terms of the >> >> way >> >> tests >> >> are run). >> >> >> >> I haven't dived deep enough into rendering tests to come up with >> >> anything >> >> concrete, but there should be a nice way to combine a webvtt file, the >> >> test file >> >> and a ref file into a more easily writeable/readable single-file format >> >> that we >> >> can generate the rest from. >> >> >> >> ## Directory Structure >> >> >> >> I'd also like to clean up the directory structure. I'm not sure if any >> >> deeper >> >> directories are needed >> >> >> >> webvtt/ >> >> api/ >> >> VTTCue/ >> >> VTTRegion/ >> >> parsing/ >> >> file-parsing/ >> >> cue-text-parsing/ >> >> rendering/ >> >> TBD >> >> >> >> ## Categorization >> >> >> >> I propose we categorize tests by keeping track of the category of a >> >> test >> >> separately (eg. in a `categories.json` file). We can then use the json >> >> output of >> >> the test runner to parse which categories/parts of the spec are well >> >> supported. >> >> >> >> The tests for `2dcontext` do something similar. >> >> >> >
Received on Wednesday, 15 February 2017 05:42:29 UTC