- From: Tim Boland <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
- Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 09:07:43 -0400
- To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
At the beginning of the document ("Abstract"), there are the terms "test case", "test suite", and "test(s)". What is the difference between a "test case" and a "test"? In TestFAQ the term used is "test" not "test case". I think it's good not to use additional terms for similar concepts unless warranted.. Is metadata only useful for conformance or also for interoperability (that is, why not just refer to test suites in general - drop "conformance" word in front of test suite)? I don't see where the word adds any value unless I'm missing something, and in TestFAQ the term used is "test suite" without qualifier in front.. If the term "test suite" is used without qualifier then generality is added, if that is appropriate.. Do we need definitions of "test", "test case", "test suite" upon first usage in "Abstract"? What objective evidence is there that "defining and providing metadata has proved helpful in a variety of instances.."? In other words, are there some examples we could reference of the usefulness of metadata? Is the XML Query example cited supporting TestFAQ or the use of metadata (just says "these principles"..)? The text in "Abstract" and that at the beginning of "Introduction" is duplicative.. Thanks and best wishes.. Tim Boland NIST
Received on Monday, 12 September 2005 13:08:38 UTC