[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Public Comment
Comment from: firstname.lastname@example.org This looks like great stuff; I'd like to know more about interoperability and testing. The spec is probably fine, but it's sufficiently long that I doubt many developers will use it as a primary reference; they'll just imitate the leading implementations. As the leading implementation is open source, this is pretty close to ideal anyway. (Does OpenOffice support the current drafts yet, by the way?) But even closer to ideal is a test suite that (a) goes from simple to complex to aid test-driven development and (b) covers any questions of interpretation that the TC knows of and (c) is mechanically checked against multiple implementations. See, for example, the OWL test cases. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/ and list of implementations http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/impls and test results from those implementations http://www.w3.org/2003/08/owl-systems/test-results-out Now testing OWL is probably a much smaller job than testing an office format, but I hope you'll give it some serious thought.