- From: <david_marston@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 14:49:43 -0400
- To: www-qa@w3.org, public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2007 18:49:31 UTC
>>I suggest that you look at the test review procedure... >Very helpful, indeed. Any more pointers to resolve 'reopen' issues? Well, I wrote something [1] for QAWG which discusses post-review complaints about test cases, with analogies to errata. The set of states that a single test case can occupy has been the subject of much discussion over the years. If your procedure keeps all submissions, you may need more states (e.g., remanded for fix, rejected, etc.) to account for tests that are not to be used but also not "active" in the review workflow. I consider this desirable, if it stops test case authors from wasting their time writing cases that someone else already wrote. .................David Marston [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2005Jan/att-0026/00-part
Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2007 18:49:31 UTC