David Bruant wrote:
Le 07/02/2014 22:05, Brendan Eich a écrit :
Kevin Smith wrote:
- A *working* implementation should be created and solutions to
real-world use cases should be programmed using the design before
any spec language is authored. Spec-language is a poor medium for
communicating both design intent and programming intent.
Yes, this.
A working implementation is a lot of work, even a polyfill. But tests.
Very recent case in point :
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20701
It was a lot of words in English, lots of HTML5 spec vocabulary with
very special and detailed meaning, I had lost track at some point,
even with the spec-y summary by Bobby [1]. But then, he created tests
and that was suddenly fairly easy to review [2]. It was fairly easy to
point places that might be under-spec'ed and needed more tests.
Yeah, a warning to auto-didactic prose-heavy spec authors.
Tests are an excellent medium to discuss feature design. The current
test suite leaves room for interpretation on a corner case? throw in a
new test to disambiguate!
Tests++. Until they overspecify, then --. No silver bullets. More tests
when in doubt.
/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss