RE: What is a subject of a test?

 

> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@sidar.org] 
> Enviado el: viernes, 01 de abril de 2005 15:37
> Para: Carlos Iglesias; shadi@w3.org; public-wai-ert@w3.org
> Asunto: Re: What is a subject of a test?
> 
> On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 23:06:02 +1000, Carlos Iglesias 
> <carlos.iglesias@fundacionctic.org> wrote:
> 
> >> > What I mean is that if we don't have a clear 
> specification then it 
> >> > will be open to personal interpretation.
> >>
> >> Sure. But this is irrelevant to the EARL spec - it is a 
> question of 
> >> how good a particular spec we are testing against is.
> > So, do you think that is the spec we are testing that should 
> > explicitly when a test case fail, pass, is not tested, not 
> applicable, 
> > etc. ?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > I think that EARL could have something to do with this. For example:
> > ValidityLevel
> > Pass - When the test case is tested and passed NotApplicable - When 
> > there is no subject to be tested
> 
> I think there are two different topics at once. I agree 
> completely that EARL should explain what its result types 
> mean, and I think that Pass / NotApplicable are like you 
> suggest. We went through the same process when we created the 
> "Partial" result type, as a subclass of Fail. It means that 
> the point is not met, but there is some attempt to meet it - 
> as opposed to completely ignoring it.

I think you're right. There are two different topics at once, and we should focus only on a better explanation of the result types and other characteristics of the specification.

Regards,

CI

 
--------------------------------------

Carlos Iglesias Moro

Fundación CTIC
Parque Científico-Tecnológico de Gijón
33203 - Gijón, Asturias, España

teléfono: +34 984291212
fax: +34 984390612
email: carlos.iglesias@fundacionctic.org
URL: http://www.fundacionctic.org

Received on Monday, 4 April 2005 10:42:36 UTC