- From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se>
- Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2001 19:57:41 +0200
- To: "'Fred L. Drake, Jr.'" <fdrake@acm.org>, "Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>
- Cc: "'www-dom-ts@w3.org'" <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
One reason to avoid 8.3 is the test's names as they currently stand, take a look at the NIST matrix... Perhaps x.3 is a better way to go if we want to avoid long suffixes. .domtest would also work, so that's mainly a design issue. I'd go for .tst personally. /Dimitris -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Fred L. Drake, Jr. [mailto:fdrake@acm.org] Skickat: den 10 augusti 2001 20:08 Till: Arnold, Curt Kopia: 'www-dom-ts@w3.org' Ämne: RE: [General] Status? Arnold, Curt writes: > They could be in the same directory as long as we use a distinct > extension for test definitions. If they are all .xml files, then > ANT can't determine which files are test definitions and should be > validated or transformed and which are test resources. I'm not sure I understand just what the limitation is. I'll have to dig into Ant a little more to figure it out. > How about .tst for test definitions? Ugh. > If we decide otherwise, we can add the log elements at any time. > I'll put that one on hold. However, leveraging the CVS log is > definitely a better approach than trying to put the equivalent log > explicitly in the test. Fine. Agreed that the log should be maintained in CVS rather than doing it manually. Arnold, Curt writes: > Or I could stop thinking 8.3, how about .domtest? Could, but there's probably no specific reason to avoid 8.3, either. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org> PythonLabs at Zope Corporation
Received on Sunday, 12 August 2001 13:58:41 UTC