- From: Art Barstow <barstow@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 16:16:46 -0400
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
On Sat, Oct 20, 2001 at 11:35:44AM +0100, Brian McBride wrote: > > Can I suggest that test cases which do not involve WG issues are something you > can just collect, don't need reviewing on a case by case basis and can be > reviewed as part of the process of publishing WD's. Less work, all round, yes? Seems like reviewing the non-issue related test cases in pieces or in one batch would take the same amount of time. > The charter states as deliverables: > > * publish a set of machine-processable test cases corresponding to > technical issues addressed by the WG > > I think this would be a great thing to do, but I > guess I have to act as charter policeman a bit here. Well, if you're going to start playing charter cop, then I don't believe the charter explictly lists as deliverables test automation or automatic triple generation :-). You may also want to consider a threshold for the number of WG members that need to approve a test case before it gets labeled as Approved in the TC doc. > Are you envisaging just a few extra test cases here and there, or something > requiring more significant effort? I currently have no plans for creating new tests. I do, however, agree with the sentiments Graham expresed in: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Oct/0429.html and wouldn't categorically deny a test case just because it doesn't represent an issue in the issue tracking doc. Art ---
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2001 16:17:50 UTC