- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:13:15 -0500
- To: ext Odin Hørthe Omdal <odinho@opera.com>
- CC: public-webapps@w3.org
On 1/24/13 1:22 PM, ext Odin Hørthe Omdal wrote: > Arthur Barstow wrote: >> Before we start a CfC to change WebApps' agreed testing process >> [Testing], please make a clear proposal regarding the submission >> process, approval process, roles, etc. as is defined in [Testing] and >> its references. (My preference is for you to document the new >> process, expectations, etc. in WebApps' Public wiki, rooted at >> <http://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/>). > > I've written (well, copied and changed) a document at: > > http://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/Submitting_tests > > It might not have everything required right now, but I think it's a > good start. :-) Thanks Odin (and sorry for the delayed reply)! As I said during one of the testing breakouts in Lyon, ultimately I suspect the saying "beggars can't be choosy" will trump. However, AFAIK, currently, only one of WebApps' thirty active specs actually has an "outside" contribution. As such, and without any information about a relatively high probability we will get contributions from others, this move still seems like a lot of "make work". Before a CfC is started, I would like to hear from Kris and/or PLH re how the move went for the HTMLWG. For instance, were there any some major "gotchas", were there any negative side-effects, etc. Kris, PLH - would you please provide a short summary of the move? I agree with James and Tobie re the name and structure issue. James' proposal was fine or something a bit shorter like "webapi-tests". I also wonder if it would be useful to separate the DOM tests (e.g. "dom-tests") although I don't feel strongly on that. Re section numbers - that seems like make work, especially for short-ish specs (e.g. Progress Events). I think using section numbers should be optional (and that metadata be included in the tests themselves). Are you actually proposing to add section numbers for every test suite that you copy? What is the expectation for what I will characterize as "legacy" specs like Marcos' widget test suites? Marcos? Test Facilitators and Test Submitters - if you haven't already provided input on Odin's proposal, please do so. My expectation is that Odin and the other volunteers will do all of the copying work. -Thanks, AB
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 17:13:53 UTC