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

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

I'll leave it to you two to write this document, it seems
you are quite set on doing so anyway.

I've had enough.


regards DaveP

On 04/10/2007, stephen.green@systml.co.uk <stephen.green@systml.co.uk> wrote:
> Quoting "Durand, Jacques R." <JDurand@us.fujitsu.com>:
>
> > 2. At the root of all this, a fundamental question on pass/fail
> > semantics. Do we want:
> > (a) pass/fail that has a test semantics only, i.e. nothing more than
> > true/false if the test is presented as a logical condition. Thus, a
> > "pass"  in a "negative TA" could be interpreted later as the IUT being
> > NOT consistent with spec requirement.
> > (b) pass/fail that has a conformance semantics (i.e. an outcome = "fail"
> > means the IUT is inconsistent with the addressed spec requirement, and
> > "pass" means consistency within scope of this test.)
> > I am leaning in favor of (b) as I think it is more intuitive. Certainly
> > many people - including me - have written their TAs that way without
> > trouble. But (b) must make room for a third outcome:
> > pass/fail/inconclusive.
>
> I too favor (b). Reason: there is a possibility that the expertise
> of those writing TAs will better cover the subject matter than the
> methodologies and logicalities of testing (since we are asking that
> spec writers write TAs in the first instance). Plus, asking that a
> set of TAs accompany a spec means that subject matter experts for
> the subject of the spec who have less expertise in testing will
> be reading and possibly reviewing the TAs along with the review of
> the spec and making the TAs match the spec logically makes sense for
> these. After all test experts are already having to turn spec logic
> into test logic on a daily basis so to have to do that for the TAs
> seems an acceptable pay-off for having spec experts write TAs.
>
> There's bound to be a downside though. Do we have to make it a case
> of EITHER (a) or (b)? Can both be catered for? I'd not be in favor of
> trying to do so personally though but if testers wish to use the TA
> guidelines they might want option (a) left open.
>
> Best regards
>
> --
> Stephen Green
>
> Partner
> SystML, http://www.systml.co.uk
> Tel: +44 (0) 117 9541606
>
> http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+22:37 .. and voice
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


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