- From: Patrick Curran <Patrick.Curran@Sun.COM>
- Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 18:41:18 -0800
- To: QAWG <www-qa-wg@w3.org>
Patrick Curran wrote: > Hi, guys: > > I have volunteered to participate in a panel discussion during the > Tech Plenary day next week. Here's the description: > > Session 4: Issues in Developing Multiple Specification Test Suites > > As W3C specifications become more modularized there is a growing > number of dependencies between W3C specifications. This panel > session will demonstrate and discuss the issues of building test > suites that include the requirements of multiple W3C > specifications for insuring interoperability. > > All input and suggestions will be welcome. I'll try to circulate a > draft of my presentation beforehand, so you have a chance to comment. > > Thanks... > The more I think about this the more I come to the conclusion that there's nothing particularly special about multi-spec specs. Yes: they look like modules, and pose the kinds of problems that modules pose (too much variability leads to a lack of interoperability). Yes, if you're authoring one you need to think carefully about how you will reference external specs (do you really want to commit to support all future versions of the referenced spec?) However, the creation of multi-spec test suites is really about developing for re-use. All of the principles that we discuss in the Test FAQ apply even more so in multi-spec situations. If you're developing a test suite just for one spec then you might be able to cut some corners. However, if you're developing for re-use (if you expect your tests to be incorporated into another test suite) it's particularly important that you clearly state the version of the spec you're testing, that you identify the assertions you're testing, that you provide appropriate test meta-data, etc. So: I'm inclined to take this approach for the presentation on Wednesday. It will give us an opportunity to preview some of the Test FAQ "goood practices", while still addressing the issue at hand. What do you all think? Thanks...
Received on Monday, 28 February 2005 02:40:19 UTC