Re: [tag] Groups - TA Anatomy V0.5 (AnatomyTA-v05.doc) uploaded

["Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com>]

On 03/10/2007, stephen.green@systml.co.uk <stephen.green@systml.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Quoting Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>:
>
>
> > If it doesn't fail, it may not pass.
> > If it doesn't pass, it may not have failed.

This is an interpretation from the Oasis site.

> >
> > It should be a boolean. If it hasn't passed it has failed.
> > If it has passed all the tests, it has passed.
> > Period.

My view

> >
>
> But I think we have to accept it that you *can't assume* the
> converse - that if it hasn't failed any of the tests it has
> passed.

I don't say that Steve. "If it has passed all the tests, it has passed"
Thats the only sensible option for a pass.

The tests may all have been negative tests designed
> to find faults but it is quite likely that not failing any
> of them will still not mean a pass as such.

Pos or neg is immaterial. A test passes or fails.
ANDing them gives the overall UUT result.


> It will just mean
> that no failure has been detected.

If a test hasn't passed (whether it ran or not) it is deemed
to have failed in my books.

Why make it more complex than that.


regards


-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk