[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [tag] Groups - Intro Material for TA Guide (Rationale.html) uploaded
On 20/09/2007, Serm Kulvatunyou <serm@nist.gov> wrote: > Re benefits. > > I'm uncomfortable with the relationship between coverage and mapping. > Classic of a high level requirement which needs 23 tests. Shown in the > coverage but has a one to many mapping, requirement to tests. Each test is > independent, but the coverage of the requirement isn't complete until all 23 > have been run? > Does this need stating? Possibly not, but it is implicit. > > > Coverage analysis > > Define coverage goals for each section. > Each section of what? The test suite? or the specification. Unclear as it > stands. > > For each partition, > is this a section? > > What percentage of assertions are covered by at least one test? > Should this be requirements? In the requirements document? > > Need a way of making it clear which document is being spoken of. > > <serm> Is it possible that we are talking about 2 different but connected > levels of coveraage - specification coverage by test assertions and test > assertion coverage by tests (test cases). </serm> Quite possibly. Since the vocabulary is clearly an issue could we have a glossary please? I was referring to spec coverage by test assertions. N.B. This is the first time I've heard of 'test cases'. Another implied assumption perhaps? Clearly different to my own! regards -- Dave Pawson XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. http://www.dpawson.co.uk
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]