RE: spec development process was: vendor prefixing

Bjoern Hoehrmann:
> What is the point, really, in having multiple implementations, then go
> to Candidate Recommendation, everybody drops the prefixes, and then see
> if anyone bothers writing a test suite? At that point it's too late for
> the test suite to uncover problems that could then be fixed as part of
> the standardization process. If problems are found, they most likely
> come from the real world, with authors actually running into problems,
> and then you'd address them in an errata mode with reluctance to make
> major changes because such changes would likely break things, just as
> would be the case if the Working Group had published a Recommendation
> instead.

In catching up on this thread, "test suite" life cycle stood out as an issue.

Why is it not until CR that "test suite" comes up?

Shouldn't the test suite be underway during WD or ED stages?

For example, why isn't every WD accompanied by a test suite that consists of (at least) every Example from the WD draft?

Received on Friday, 2 December 2011 17:09:37 UTC