- From: David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk>
- Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:56:05 +0100
- To: W3C HTML Mailing List <www-html@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 12:46:55PM +0100, Nicholas Shanks wrote: > >One argument that I haven't seen mentioned is QA testing. How is a QA > >tool supposed to test a document for conformance to a specification if > >the document doesn't indicate what specification it is written > >against? > The point was that separate QA tools shouldn't be needed because the > target browser would do the QA and the developer couldn't even test > their website until it was conformant (conformance being required for > interoperability) Same problem applies. If the browser is going to perform QA then the browser needs to know what specification it is testing against, unless it is going to test against every one that it knows about (which wouldn't be very efficient). Also, how would *bulk* testing of (for instance, automatically generated) documents take place? Manually pointing a browser at every one of them? There is a need for real QA tools. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk
Received on Thursday, 26 April 2007 11:56:13 UTC