RE: SURVEY: Test case naming

A) -0
B) +0
C) -0
D) +0
E) +0
F) +0.8
G) +0.6

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-dom-ts-request@w3.org [mailto:www-dom-ts-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Arnold, Curt
> Sent: Tuesday 21 August 2001 22:27
> To: 'www-dom-ts@w3.org'
> Subject: SURVEY: Test case naming
> 
> 
> I'd like to take a survey on renaming the test cases 
> currently in the repository.  Anything other than A, E or G 
> would probably require intervention by someone well versed in 
> CVS and with file system
> access.
> 
> The NIST submitted Level 1 test cases are currently in the 
> repository with all lower case names that provide a summary 
> of the tests (for example, 
> textsplittextnomodificationallowederr.xml).  Should
> we:
> 
> A) Do nothing
> B) Rename the repository files to MixedCaseNames.xml 
> preserving their current history.
> C) Rename the repository files to camelCaseNames.xml 
> preserving their current history.
> D) Rename them to InterfaceNameDD (for example, Node01.xml) 
> preserving their current history.
> E) Rename them to InterfaceNameDD by committing new files and 
> deleting the current files hiding the revision history since Sunday.
> F) Rename them to InterfaceName_FeatureDD (for example, 
> Node_nodeValue01.xml) preserving their current history.
> G) Rename them to InterfaceName_FeatureDD by committing new 
> files and deleting the current files hiding the revision history.
> 
> If we want to do anything, we should do it now before the 
> tests get out.
> 
> Again, Vote +1 for something that you would prefer, +0 for 
> something that you'd go along with, -0 for something that 
> you'd prefer didn't happen but would tolerate, and -1 for 
> something that you are
> against.
> 
> Any other options?
> 
> My votes:
> 
> A) +0
> B) +0
> C) -0
> D) +0
> E) +0
> F) +0.5
> G) +0.5
> 
> Reasoning: Okay, I didn't follow the rules, I'm only 
> half-hearted on this.  I think that the shorter names would 
> be more pleasing on test matrixes and other reports.
>