- From: David Marston/Cambridge/IBM <david_marston@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 14:09:39 -0400
- To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
I don't plan to be in the teleconference tomorrow, so I'll send along these observations: VAGUENESS (Checkpoints 1.5, 4.6): Ideally, the specs have no vagueness. Test developers can identify the "known" areas of vagueness, but must synchronize with errata. Scanning the documents to detect vagueness and cataloging feedback sent to the spec editors are two different things; which would this checkpoint espouse? TARGET AREAS (Guideline 2): Is this like the product classes, profiles, or modules that we have been discussing in Spec Guidelines? If so, the terminology should be aligned. DIMENSIONS OF VARIABILITY (Checkpoints 4.7, 4.8, 4.9): One could produce a test suite that just tests the bottom level, or no options, or no extensions, but one must make the test suite adaptable to the discretionary choices. REPEATABILITY (Checkpoints 4.2, 4.3, 4.10, 5.2, 5.7, 5.8, 7.2): Any published results should contain sufficient information about the test conditions so that an independent lab can set up the same conditions, run the same suite, and (ideally) get the same results for the same test subject. .................David Marston
Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2002 14:12:27 UTC