Testing and Web+TV (was: Re: Testing and WebMob

Tobie,

for your background: since you left the W3C team, there have been some 
new developments, in particular at the recent Web+TV workshop.

At the workshop, people agreed that testing continues to be important, 
and that it would be ideal to have a common solution for all HTML based 
products. A number of outstanding issues were identified, in particular 
that more information is needed on what is already ongoing, how it could 
be made suitable for the TV industry, and how to create more test cases 
for the TV industry.

The conclusion was that the Web+TV IG should revive its Testing Task 
Force  to
- look at the existing tools and material
- see if they are suitable for the TV industry
- if not, work to address the missing features

Also, it was suggested to organize a "Test the Web Forward" event 
focusing on TV.

So expect more questions of "newbies" in the future - based on reading 
the thread, it might be a useful first step for someone (e.g. TV IG, 
Testing Open Source Effort) to document "how to get involved" somewhere.

Slide 4 -Philipp

On 3/28/2014 9:36 PM, Tobie Langel wrote:
> On Mar 28, 2014, at 20:42, "SULLIVAN, BRYAN L" <bs3131@att.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the guidance, Tobie. And apologies for any unintended offense (certainly none was intended). The lack of focus is a perception I have due to the fact that the current activity is not very apparent in any really accessible way, e.g. regular meetings, an archived mail list, up-to-date info on the wiki, etc. Thus I have difficulty assessing what is the current activity level and where we can get engaged.
> The wiki should be killed. It is no longer maintained.
>
>> Re the channels on TTWF, do you mean those at http://testthewebforward.org/discuss.html ?
>> * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-testtwf/ (very light traffic)
>> * irc channel: irc.w3.org#testing (not a good option for many of us behind corporate firewalls and not able to install IRC clients to stay connected all the time, or to review what's happened/discussed recently... it's OK for meetings but not as a main medium of engagement)
>> * https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests and the resources that one can find referenced there
>>   * https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/issues and https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pulls (useful to track what is being done at a granular level, but not really replacing a forum, mail list, or wiki where things can be discussed)
>>   * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-testsuite/ (very light traffic)
> The irc channel,
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-test-infra/ mailing list,
> github repository and testthewebforward.org blog are the key channels.
>
> If you have firewall issues with irc may I suggest using a hosted
> client such irccloud.com. As you're logged in though their service,
> you can catch up on conversations that happened while you were away.
>
>> For those on the inside of this activity, actively engaged and setup with the tools to being engaged as needed, this might be an adequate set of resources. But for those attempting to get engaged, it represents a significant barrier.
> I'm sorry if this is the case. We've done our best to improve this
> (and I think we've been rather successful given the recent uptake).
> Frankly, we haven't heard such complains recently. That said, there's
> always room for improvement. Unfortunately, we lack resources to
> provide better docs, regular updates to what's going on, etc. maybe
> that's something you'd be interested to provide (e.g. through
> fortnightly posts on the testthewebforward blog).
>
>> And it remains very difficult (to me at least) to draw any overall picture of how this program is working and where it is attempting to go as a coherent community effort.
> Really? That's rather surprising. Much like any open source projects,
> contribution are driven by contributors' needs. When a vendor cares
> about a given technology, tests tend to appear as if by magic.
> Likewise, vendors who want to run these tests internally tend to build
> and share tools to do so. If you have specific requirements, you might
> consider ponying up resources to build them your best option. And
> you'll find the community welcoming should you do so.
>
> --tobie
>
>
>