- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 17:32:35 +0100
- To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
FYI After our failure to submit a review of the QA specification guidelines, I have sent a personal review of the QA test guidelines that are not yet in last call. It is, if anything, more opinionated, and less helpful than my earlier opinionated and unhelpful review of the specification guidelines, and I am not seeking WG endorsement. Document reviewed: http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-qaframe-test-20030516/ Review: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2003Jul/0004 However, one thing I would point out is that in their framework: - we would have test assertions scattered throughout S&AS. In particular every necessary and every sufficient condition would become an RFC 2119 MUST - we would have metadata with each such assertion - we would have at least one test for each assertion - we would relate each test to every tested assertion If anyone feels motivated I would welcome contributions of such tests or such metadata. We certainly could do with more tests. I believe focussing on the issues for which we do not have tests is likely to be more cost effective. Jeremy
Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2003 12:35:11 UTC