Re: Tin Man Design Question 9 - to vote Jan. 9th?

[Carmelo Montanez <carmelo@nist.gov>]

Hi All:

    I will err on the side of simplicity and take the approach of not
differentiating between standard output and standard error,  I don't
see any particular reason why not to do that.  Any other takes?

Carmelo
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <David_Marston@lotus.com>
To: <xslt-conformance@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 3:19 PM
Subject: Tin Man Design Question 9 - to vote Jan. 9th?


> Here is one of the issues identified in my message titled
> "Test Case Markup & Cataloging, Tin Man edition" that I sent
> to this list on 12/1/2000:
> 9. Do we want to collapse standard output and standard error
> together?
> 
> DISCUSSION:
> The spec doesn't seem to recognize where "console output"
> goes. The "compare" attribute of the Scenario element can be
> simpler if we don't recognize standard output and standard
> error as distinct. Those representing the test-lab interests
> should speak up if you think there is a need to keep the two
> separate. If separate, the output comparison for messages
> would insist on getting the required message through the
> specified channel.
> 
> This design assumes that we can devise a reasonable way to
> deal with messages. I think that we can get at least part of
> the way to reasonable. I can expound on that idea at the
> meeting, if you wish.
> 
> Ultimately, this would be a "lump or separate" vote.
> .................David Marston
> 
>