- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 19:21:47 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
- cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011, Adrian Bateman wrote: > > At Microsoft, we also prefer smaller more specific specifications for > all the same reasons that it makes sense to engineer software in > smaller, more modular parts. > > * It is easier to implement and test smaller modules. Developers find it > easier to focus on one thing and it is easier for testers to do a > thorough job of preparing a test suite. This doesn't apply to specs, since smaller specs usually just means that the same complicated feature is now split over multiple specifications. This actually makes testing harder, since you have to try to work out how the specification work together rather than having just one document that defines the behaviour. > * It's much easier to measure "done" when dealing with a smaller spec. Specifications are never "done", however small. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 20 August 2011 19:22:45 UTC