[Fwd: Re: [xslt-conformance] Minutes -- amendments]

[Jeff Kenton <jkenton@datapower.com>]

Amendments (clarification) to the minutes, from Dave Marston:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [xslt-conformance] Minutes -- amendments
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 10:29:43 -0500
From: David Marston/Cambridge/IBM <david_marston@us.ibm.com>
To: Jeff Kenton <jkenton@datapower.com>





 >Roll call and quorum
There should be a heading for "absent" and a list of the voting members
who were not there. After a certain pattern of absences, a member must
receive certain warnings, and eventually be kicked off. The minutes
serve as the documentation.

 >Outstanding action items
 >     - Carmelo: model and prototype rendition control
 >       Questions raised:
 >            Raise errors or not? (Pranav)
 >       Resolution:
 >            ...accept results rather than raise errors.

The issue is really: can we pick one of the discretionary choices in
the absence of information about which choice was made by the
developer? (Carmelo wanted to pick the "raise-error" choice where
available.
The resolution is really: when in doubt, don't filter any tests and
let the failures fall where they may. The test lab needs to review
all failures anyway, and may be able to determine which choice was
made. They could do a re-run of the suite with better filtering, or
contact the developer.
.......Dave


-- 
--------------------------
Jeff Kenton
DataPower Technology, Inc.