W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > January 2004

Re: RDF Core test driven development and QA Test Doc

From: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 09:34:27 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>, Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, www-qa-wg@w3.org, sandro@w3.org


Thanks for butting in - your clarification helps a lot.   IMO, the intent 
of the checkpoint is as you state:
>Checkpoint 1.3. The testing approach to be used is documented.
>NOTE:  A single uniform testing approach may not be appropriate for all 
>aspects of a specification.  The testing approach may define different 
>approaches for different aspects, for example, different approaches may be 
>used for testing document syntax and for testing document processing.  The 
>structure of a specification may give useful clues to the different kinds 
>of tests that would be useful.
>[Priority 1]

We just didn't do a good job at writing it.  We appreciate your comments as 
well as Jeremy's - Please keep in mind that the TestGL is still under 
development - many changes are being made. We have been talking to test 
developers as well as WGs to learn about how they build tests so that we 
can capitalize on their experience and not violate what is being done.  The 
goal is not to be burdensome or obtrusive, but to actually provide 
something useful - this isn't always easy to do.   The WG is scheduling a 
telecon to discuss Jeremy's comments.  Although we haven't made the Agenda 
for our March meeting at Tech Plenary, I'm sure that TestGL will be a topic 
of discussion. Since our meetings are open to all - You, Jeremy and others 
are welcome to join.

Received on Wednesday, 7 January 2004 09:35:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:27 UTC