- From: Philip Jägenstedt <foolip@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 11:49:37 +0000
- To: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, Daniel Veditz <dveditz@mozilla.com>
- Cc: "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAARdPYdhVKiP03m=FmKZgsyzgyAAfePbt3pFvKE7qyhDmcrG5g@mail.gmail.com>
Quite excited about this, is this blocked on having a meeting? On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 1:50 PM Mike West <mkwst@google.com> wrote: > I'm in favor of adopting a policy along the lines of Web Performance's. > Requiring tests for changes to a document in CR, in particular, seems like > a no-brainer, since we ought to have enough implementation experience by > that point to make writing tests against an implementation trivial. > > I'm a little more skeptical about a test-first approach to designing a > feature in the first place, though, as I see some marginal risk of locking > ourselves into a bad design just due to inertia and sunk cost. Chrome's > incubation-first strategy seems like a reasonable way of mitigating this > from a working group perspective (e.g. we'd only adopt documents (and > therefore apply a test-first policy to them)) once we were reasonably > confident that their general shape was itself reasonable. > > +Philip who's been thinking about this a lot, both from Chrome's > perspective, and from the perspective of the WHATWG (where such a policy is already > solidly in place <https://whatwg.org/working-mode>)). > > -mike > > On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 9:47 PM, Daniel Veditz <dveditz@mozilla.com> wrote: > >> The W3 leadership has been emphasizing the importance of ensuring >> interoperability through Web Platform Tests. Some groups have adopted a >> policy of requiring corresponding web-platform-tests pull requests for >> before landing normative spec changes. Since interoperability is part of >> getting a spec to become a Recommendation this makes sense especially for >> specs that are in or entering CR. Should we adopt such a policy? >> >> The Web Performance group adopted the following: >> [[ >> ALL normative spec changes are generally expected to have a >> corresponding pull request in web-platforms-tests, either in the form of >> new tests or modifications to existing tests, or must include the >> rationale for why test updates are not required for the proposed update. >> [...] >> ]] >> https://github.com/w3c/web-per <http://goog_1391446905> >> formance/blob/gh-pages/CONTRIB <http://goog_1391446905>UTING.md >> >> ... and the CSS Working Group adopted one last week: >> [[ >> For normative changes for any specification in CR or later as well as the >> pre-CR specifications listed below, a corresponding web-platform-tests PR >> must be provided, except if testing is not practical; for other >> specifications it is usually appreciated. Typically, both PRs will be >> merged at the same time. Note that a test change that contradicts the spec >> should not be merged before the corresponding spec change. >> [...] >> ]] >> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md >> >> Good idea? Objections? Respond on list and we can talk about it on our >> next call (Sept 20). >> >> -Dan Veditz >> > >
Received on Wednesday, 27 September 2017 11:50:15 UTC