- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 14:03:28 +0200
- To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: "webont" <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
> I wished to write down my concerns about the scoping of the TEST work. > > > Test suites have many different purposes: > - checking correctness > - at particular points (issue driven) > - generally (conformance testing) > - exercising difficult problems > - performance testing > - scale testing regression tests etc > Test suites have at least two different audiences: > - systems and their developers > - other humans > > The latter audience prefer small tests that can be easily understood. > This audience may be reading the tests in order to better understand some text. > > ========================= > > > My view is that we need to be clear as to what we are trying to achieve. > > I suggest that we should generate tests that illustrate our issue resolutions. > I suggest that we should keep all our tests as small as possible. right, and they could be written in our (non-normative) presentation syntaxes, also testing that as well... > I suggest that we should not aim at a conformance test suite. agreed, that is what different implementations should take care of > I suggest that performance and scalability tests (and the like) are out of > scope. > > I think some of Ian's tests are > - exercising difficult problems > and > - as small as they can be to illustrate the issue. > (Modulo the OILedit => DAML+OIL conversion which appears a bit verbose!) > > As such I think I support them ... agreed -- , Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Wednesday, 26 June 2002 08:04:06 UTC