Re: Answer to Ian Hickson: Additions to "write tests"

On Tue, 3 May 2005, Karl Dubost wrote:
> 
> Thank you for your comment, which the QA Working Group has accepted with 
> modification.  The comment is a good one, but a bit out of scope since 
> it is about how to write good tests.  However, we have reworded the 
> affected section to clarify and it now reads 
> 
>  What does it mean? For each feature, the Working Group might seek 
> early implementation to demonstrate the feature. If early 
> implementations are not available (e.g., due to commercial constraints, 
> IPR, etc.), it is beneficial to write test cases to illustrate a concept 
> or use case of the technology. This provides a way to to study the 
> interactions between the different parts of the specification and reveal 
> problems. Additionally, these test cases can be incorporated into a test 
> suite.

I accept this resolution, but would encourage the working group to word it 
slightly differently -- namely, making it clear that tests are not an 
alternative to implementations, but a critical part of getting 
interoperability (i.e. a critical part of writing a specification).

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2005 16:17:39 UTC