- From: Carlos Iglesias <carlos.iglesias@fundacionctic.org>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 19:27:32 +0100
- To: <shadi@w3.org>
- Cc: <public-wai-ert@w3.org>
> The question is really: one property or two? I kind of > understand the arguments but am concerned people may confuse > the two on regular basis which would make reports incompatible. IMO those who could be interested in EARL are mainly people who are involved in testing process. If they are involved in testing process they are used to the usual testing wording and terminology (Requirements, Test Cases, Results, etc.), so probably they are quite sure about what requirements and test cases are and they are aware about the differences between them. The problem could be the introduction of new terminology which is not the usual one, or even worse, change the common accepted meaning of usual terminology. IMO again, EARL should use the usual testing terminology as far as possible, and should use it to refer what it is supposed to mean (Requirements for requirements, Test Cases for the testing process, etc.) Regards, CI.
Received on Tuesday, 31 January 2006 18:27:49 UTC