[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Reference implementation. Layout perfect.]
oops, forgot to make sure the list was addressed...
--- Begin Message ---
- From: Shawn <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: email@example.com
- Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:36:03 -firstname.lastname@example.org wrote: > Or just do it by manual inspection. There are ways of making that > approach tractable. I am hesitant to introduce manual tests. Doing so introduces a very subjective input from humans. A pleasing shade of red to me, may be jarring to you. An interpretation of an output may be fine for me, but may fail for you. The results are NOT definitive. You attempt to address this by implying we'd need many eyes/testers and then taking the common deviants. This adds costs. Not just financial, but time/effort, resources, etc. If we can define the rules that say a document/spreadsheet/presentation either passes or fails a specific test, then we *should* be able to write code to implement that rule. HOW we do that is well, irrelevant I think. I don't think this TC is here to build the tools, but only to define them. (building some samples would be handy though). Of course, as the convener/director of the TC you are free to correct me here. :) If we can boil the testing routine down to code (or a set of rules that can be coded), then we accomplish a number of things: - indiscriminate and fair testing. i.e. no favortism - removal of administrative overhead - easy testing. volunteers/workers don't need to be organized, results collated, etc. - Efficient testing. volunteers/workers don't need to be organized, results collated, etc. Resulting in a much more frequent testing/revisions (hopefully). An ODF document is ultimately a bunch of data organized according to the rules of the ODF standard. If we cannot properly define the rules that say if that document conforms to the standard well, or is done in a way so that it interoperates with other applications well, then we cannot write any code. Which means that all testing is manual and subjective. Which means the testing is more or less meaningless. Subjective means a moving target. My thoughts. Shawn--- End Message ---