- From: lynne rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@Nist.gov>
- Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 19:36:42 -0400
- To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Ck1.3 ConfReq. Don't need to define the scope, goal and purpose, since this is already requested in CP 1.1. Also, suggest being more direct in what is required. Suggested wording: "The testing approach of each logical partition of the test suite MUST be described." In several of our test development efforts, we can automatically generate tests (e.g., Schema's datatypes) and will need to generate tests manually or via another method for other parts of the Schema spec. For datatypes we don't generate test assertions - the specification is very explicit is defining the datatype, how to derive data types, and ranges of values. Cp2.2. I think that what is important is that this information is captured. For our test suites, where we do not generate test assertions, this information is captured in various ways - as part of a test description file which is associated with every test case or in each test case in its documentation I think that the 5th bullet (whether the assertion is ambiguous...) should be removed from this list, but could be put into its own checkpoint GL3, 2nd para - "This process should address ...." The checkpoints don't address the items in this list, e.g., where they will be stored, filtering.
Received on Saturday, 23 August 2003 19:37:17 UTC