OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

tag-discuss message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: RE: [tag-discuss] Re: a few questions to kick-off the discussion


Title: RE: [tag-discuss] Re: a few questions to kick-off the discussion

Hi,
See inline
Abbie


Subject: RE: [tag-discuss] Re: a few questions to kick-off the discussion

  _____  




> Talking about TA's writers, will the editor of a spec well also be
> responsible for inserting
> (and/or) editing the TA's?

IMO, ideally yes... now "responsible" may be interpreted in different
ways. Let us just say that the target readers for a test assertion guide
(TAG), would be the members of every tech committee that designs a
specification.

Some benefits in having spec writers also write TAs:

-  having to think in terms of how features can be tested, or how
conformance should be verified, is beneficial to the spec design process
itself. Often, gaps in a spec are found only at implementation phase
(e.g. expected handling of error cases), and TAs have proved useful to
uncover such gaps in time, when done concurrently to spec.

---abbie
Yes indeed. This will help the development of better specs.
---abbie


- That is also where we establish a clear distinction between TA and
Test Case: the group designing a spec is not required (nor has the
expertise, or the resource ) to write a test suite for it. But just
handing a spec narrative over to a test team, is a recipe for
misunderstandings, slow progress and lots of interaction with a spec
guru who ends up bearing a big responsibility...  TAs appear to be the
right interface between these teams.

-Jacques
---abbie
Yes agree.
---abbie




[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]