Re: [qaframe-spec] What is testable? from Bjoern Hoehrmann on 2003-09-04 (www-qa@w3.org from September 2003)

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 03:06:32 +0200
To: "Jim Ley" <jim@jibbering.com>
Cc: <www-qa@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3fe988f5.391856760@smtp.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>

* Jim Ley wrote:
>> you could for example say that
>> something is testable if one could reasonably expect conformance testing
>> software to proof it.
>
>Testable should be able to encompass things which are not currently likely
>to be software computable, human testing could be sufficient, as long as
>pass/fail wasn't subjective.

So everything humans can test is considered testable? Under this
definition it makes small sense to talk about testability at all,
as something that is untestable is likely to be unimplementable.

Received on Wednesday, 3 September 2003 21:07:00 UTC