> - I have got rid of the <header> element and instead added specific metadata
> elements. The header is a bit of a cop-out: we ought to reach agreement on
> what metadata elements we should have. I added:
>
> <documentation> - like your dc:description)
> <section> - gives the section of the spec being tested eg
> <section>6.2.1</section>; you can have multiple section elements if multiple
> sections are being tested
I agree to have typical ones like <title> or <documentation> explicit,
but <header> is very useful by itself. So I want to keep that, too.
For example, depending on the situation, I sometimes exclude some of the
test cases. I'd like to use meta information in the header for this.
As for explicit metadata elements, I'd like to propose <title> (or
<name>), which is supposed to have a short string that represents its
name.
> - I made resources local to each test case, and made the directory structure
> explicit
Some of my test cases share a common resource between test cases. So I'd
appreciate if we can keep resources a bit more reusable.
I guess we can make resources <testSuite>-local; resources can be
written only under <testSuite> and test cases directly contained in that
test suite can reference them. In this way, when we extract files into a
directory structure, one test suite can go into one directory and
everything will work file.
Also, how do you use <dir> in resources? Is this necessary? Are you
using it to test the xml:base handling?
> - A test case always contains exactly one schema
> -I renamed validPattern and invalidPattern to correct and incorrect to match
This is wonderful.
regards,
--
Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI +1 650 786 0721
Sun Microsystems
