On Nov 11, 2011, at 4:24 AM, Tor Arne Vestbø wrote: > On 07.11.11 15:44, Alan Stearns wrote: >> What if we defer some of the W3C metadata work until tests were actually >> submitted to the W3C? >> >> 1. Tests we pull from W3C can run from manifests, since they are provided. >> >> 2. Tests we develop ourselves just use a naming convention (refs are named >> *-ref.html, and there's one ref per test even if that's duplicative) >> >> 3. When we choose to share a set of tests with the W3C, we do the extra work >> of adding metadata to the tests and possibly refactoring to reduce the >> number of -ref files. Once the W3C approves the tests we pull their copies >> and delete ours. > > I think this is the "best of both worlds" approach
Yes, I support this proposal too. We may find we can automate (3) with a script. It sounds pretty mechanical. For (2), I would name the reference files *-expected.html to fit in with other formats of expected results such as *-expected.txt and *-expected.png. -- Darin _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
