- From: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: 26 Nov 2003 16:43:57 +0100
- To: david_marston@us.ibm.com
- Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Received on Wednesday, 26 November 2003 10:44:23 UTC
Le ven 31/10/2003 à 20:46, Dimitris Dimitriadis a écrit : > Here follows my review of the TCDL WG note > (http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2003/10/tcdl-20031013.html). Some random remarks on my own, inspired also from Dimitris' review: - we should make sure we clearly distinguish the definition of the data model from the actual markup (and schema technology) used to anchor it - I agree with Dimitris that the test case should be the atom, and the versioning question (in a broad sense, including levels hierarchy, changes from errata, etc.) should be done at another level; e.g.: <testCase id="foo"> <description>Testing that foo is bar</description> </testCase> <conformanceObject id="foo-1-parser"> <name>FooML Level 1 Parser</name> <testCasesList> <li href="#foo"/> </testCasesList> </conformanceObject> - many aspects of it make me think that using RDF to model this would make it easier for many things; but that doesn't need to be a requirement Dom -- Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/ W3C/ERCIM mailto:dom@w3.org
Received on Wednesday, 26 November 2003 10:44:23 UTC