- From: Sandra Martinez <sandra.martinez@nist.gov>
- Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 07:29:14 -0400
- To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Cc: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>, Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>, www-qa@w3.org
The HTML validator by it self, in our definition, will not be considered a test suite but a validation tool that could be used as part of the test procedures to check conformance to the standard (validation) , in that way it will be considered encompassing in the test suite definition. This is my understanding. Sandra At 04:33 PM 5/30/2002 -0600, Lofton Henderson wrote: >At 01:37 PM 5/30/02 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote: > >>On Thu, 30 May 2002, Karl Dubost wrote: >> >> > At 22:20 -0400 2002-05-23, Mark Skall wrote: >> > >> > >I'm not sure where the "validation" definition came from. Tying >> > >validation to a document is way too restrictive. The definition we >> > >usually use is "the process necessary to perform conformance testing >> > >in accordance with a prescribed procedure and an official test >> > >suite." >> > >> > In a case of the HTML validator you don't have a Test Suite. >> >>"HTML validator" is, essentially, a "Test Suite", isn't it? I know >>that the current definition does not imply that but it should be >>possible to have a single term that describes all validators, >>including test suites. "Validator"? It should not matter, for the >>purpose of the glossary, whether we are validating compliance with a >>protocol, a markup language, or whatever... > >I thought -- correct me if this is wrong, Mark or Sandra -- that NIST used >"test suite" in an encompassing way, that would include an HTML >validator. However the Glossary definition of "test suite" doesn't seem >to imply that. > >-Lofton. > Sandra I. Martinez National Institute of Standards and Technology 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8970, Gaithersburg, Md. 20899 (301) 975-3579 sandra.martinez@nist.gov
Received on Friday, 31 May 2002 07:32:25 UTC