See also: IRC log
cs: a number of test cases have been migrated
with scripts
... so far 57
... need to start structure review
rr: have begun uploading, still working out the
kinks
... what about tests that are already in wiki?
cs: will need to be updated to new id and test
filenames
... won't be removed from repository
cv: why can't remove tests?
mc: URI persistence policy, need to not break links etc.
cv: have a deprecated status?
cs: have rejected, but for WG rejects
... could add a status
RESOLUTION: create status "deprecated" and apply to tests that are no longer valid
<Christophe> Test samples for SC 2.5.1: sc2.5.1_l1_002 and sc2.5.1_l1_003
<Christophe> ... and sc2.5.1_l1_004
mc: why using SC number instead of filename instead of ID, leading to this need to change?
cs: inherited from Bentoweb
mc: propose we not worry about the tests whose IDs need to change until can discuss URI persistence with Shadi; continue uploading knowing might change IDs (automatable)
cs: next step is to start structure review process
rr: what about test cases that need jsp?
mc: unsure status of action checking with systeam
cs: need clear idea of where Java server needs to run, maintenance, etc.
<scribe> ACTION: MichaelC to investigate JSP server with Systeam [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/14-tsdtf-minutes.html#action01]
mc: may need to hold back on uploading these test cases until we know
cs: roughly 20 / 466 test cases
... have found issues with some of the tests, sent message to list
... would like them fixed, then can start review process
... also have a bunch of test samples in the repository that need to be
updated
... question of whether to wait to do review process until those are done, or
do in parallel
mc: propose in parallel
rr: ones that need updating, each submitter should update their own?
cs, cv: yes
RESOLUTION: everyone keep uploading test cases, except JSP and those without a testcase mapping
cs: Bentoweb people should check for issues in
tests in repository
... non Bentoweb people start checking tests submitted earlier, against
previous WD of WCAG
cv: can we get WCAG WG members to help?
mc: might be able to ask a few people
<scribe> ACTION: MichaelC to ask selected members of WCAG WG to help with review process [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/14-tsdtf-minutes.html#action02]
mc: how is review conducted?
cv, cs: update wiki, also should send note to mailing list
cv: document says to notify author only
... propose also notify list
mc: which tests are the older tests that are ready for review?
cs: can make a list
<scribe> ACTION: Christophe to create list of tests ready for review [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/14-tsdtf-minutes.html#action03]
mc: recommend dividing blocks of tests assigned to "reviewer 1, reviewer 2" etc. and plugging reviewers into those slots
<scribe> ACTION: Christophe to divide list of tests by proposed reviewer [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/08/14-tsdtf-minutes.html#action04]
mc: reluctant to commit to doing review because
covering for Ben, but will try to find others
... Tim, can do a batch?
tb: yes
mc: need to chase reviewers to make sure they get their review done for next meeting
cv: can chase once get names
mc: chase me for names if needed
tb: these are structure reviews or content reviews?
cs: structure