[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [tag] Thread: TA modeling - RE: [tag] TA Model still weak on tests of structure?
On 27/09/2007, stephen.green@systml.co.uk <stephen.green@systml.co.uk> wrote: > >> Outcome: > >> The Test Expression MUST be true > > > > Badly designed? What expression? > > 'Test Expression' > > in other words > > "For a candidate envelope containing a soap:Body element the > soap:Envelope does not have direct children after the soap:Body element" Satisfiable in multiple xpath expressions, but better than 'x must be true' :- > > > What variables. > > The example might seem incomplete (especially if you are looking for an actual > test) but this is a real world example form an set of TAs for an actual > profile. Which QA should clearly reject Steve if that's an example :-) > > > > A test must test something, some test outcome must be measured > > in some way. > > Again, I'm not trying to establish best practise for actually writing > the test assertion content, just a sensible, simplest best-fit structure > for a general TA which meets, as much as possible for such a structure, > the breadth of prior art examples on which we are focusing. > > I hope the above clarifies my proposal. Not so hopeful it will persuade :-) My only real concern is that any examples that go towards a standard are clear, explicit and resolvable? 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]