Hi,

what is in place for PDF/A validation is too specific, as you said, we
only expect an error code (as we only validate isartor files). Bavaria
Test suite contains a format where conforming and non conforming are
handled, it is IMO a better source of inspiration.

BR,

Guillaume

On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Maruan Sahyoun <sahy...@fileaffairs.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I fully agree that the target should be to have automated tests. wo that the 
> benefit will be limited. As for error codes/messages we could 
> reuse/generalize what’s in place for the PDF/A validator. Bavarian test suite 
> from pdflib also has a good set of test/result descriptions.
>
> BR
> Maruan Sahyoun
>
> Am 09.12.2013 um 16:00 schrieb Timo Boehme <timo.boe...@ontochem.com>:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> this would be a valuable resource, especially if the test can be automated - 
>> thus we need to somehow specify the expected result (exception, warning, 
>> result document/text) for automated processing. Maybe we should start using 
>> error codes?
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Timo
>>
>>
>>
>> Am 08.12.2013 15:43, schrieb Maruan Sahyoun:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> as we are handling and closing issues using PDFs provided by users of the 
>>> library what do you think about adding these files to a test suite if these 
>>> can be used to check for a behavior of handling specific issues.
>>>
>>> The benefit would be that we can write tests around these issues to ensure 
>>> that forthcoming releases are still able to handle these files.
>>>
>>> An idea for a naming convention would be something like <issue 
>>> number><short description> e.g. 1769-invalid_xref.pdf
>>>
>>> WDYT
>>>
>>> Maruan Sahyoun
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Timo Boehme
>> OntoChem GmbH
>> H.-Damerow-Str. 4
>> 06120 Halle/Saale
>> T: +49 345 4780474
>> F: +49 345 4780471
>> timo.boe...@ontochem.com
>>
>> _____________________________________________________________________
>>
>> OntoChem GmbH
>> Geschäftsführer: Dr. Lutz Weber
>> Sitz: Halle / Saale
>> Registergericht: Stendal
>> Registernummer: HRB 215461
>> _____________________________________________________________________
>>
>

Reply via email to