Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Gary Stephenson wrote: > > their hands in the real world of implementation. IMHO it would be much better > if the W3C ditched the idea of "specs" altogether in favour of "test suites". > The spec would then effectively just be a narrative on the test suite, and > there could be far less room for misinterpretation and wasted effort. I agree that test suites are important, which is why I think your suggestion interesting enough to worry about. I see a couple of problems with it: [1] If the W3C published test suites instead of specs, errors in the test suite would become part of the spec, wouldn't they? I think this idea has many of the same attractions and pitfalls as saying "let's forget about defining justice and just define laws" - how can you then argue a need for any new or changed law? [2] Specs precede implementation better than test packs do - it is easier to define a complete spec than it is to define a complete test suite, and many test questions cannot reasonably be anticipated unless you make assumptions about how the application will be implemented. Francis.
|
