On 23/05/14 10:06, Elfy wrote: > On 21/05/14 20:32, Jack Fromm wrote: >> <snip> >>> Ideas on changes to testcases ? You've been reading and using them >>> for almost 2 cycles now. >> I think for the most part they've been tweaked pretty well and cover >> most of what needs to be tested without going overboard. The only >> suggestion I would have for improvement would be a minor one about >> the formatting. There doesn't appear to be a standardized convention >> for differentiating between menu choices, buttons and check boxes and >> keyboard input required from the tester, etc. Maybe the xml format >> is too limited for making things better, but it can be hard to follow >> some of the testcases at a glance. > I don't know enough about that to make a sensible comment. Other than > - can you be more specific about a particular testcase - I might be > able to look at that then
We can add new (micro)formats as needed. However, we are currently relying only on pure HTML markup, which is a big plus. Introducing any classes or such should be well thought out and useful, since it adds to the testcase markup and makes it a bit less legible. This is not a huge problem, but we don't want to make reading/writing the testcases any more complex than it is now if the benefit is only minor. I can agree some classes might be worth the while though. We should probably coordinate this effort through the QA team so everybody can be planning and benefit of it. I've just subscribed the -quality mailing list [1], so we can take it there or #ubuntu-quality on Freenode. Cheers, Pasi [1] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality -- Pasi Lallinaho (knome) » http://open.knome.fi/ Leader of the Shimmer Project » http://shimmerproject.org/ Ubuntu member, Xubuntu team member » http://xubuntu.org/
-- xubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
