- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 17:26:50 +0700
- To: "Johannes Koch" <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>, public-wai-ert@w3.org
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 17:21:15 +0700, Johannes Koch <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > Carlos A Velasco schrieb: >> Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote: >>> If the test is "does the Java unit compile" or "is the Java >>> code valid" then these warnings you describe *are* subclasses of >>> 'pass'. >>> What are you testing for? >> If you take, let us say, a c/c++ compiler with different optimization >> levels, warnings could be a subclass of "pass" or "fail": > > or cannotTell > >> it is not >> clear to me which one to take. > > IMHO compiler warnings are a pass of the "but you should do better" kind. The point is that warnings are used with such a total lack of interoperability in terms of a validity level that making an instance class called warning is a bad idea unless we want to bring that level of non-interoperability into EARL results. Cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group hablo español - je parle français - jeg lærer norsk chaals@opera.com Try Opera 9 now! http://opera.com
Received on Tuesday, 24 October 2006 10:27:10 UTC