Tests cases specification #120
Conversation
|
|
||
| ## Initialization ## {#1} | ||
|
|
||
| Purpose: Ensuring that it is unambiguous yet user friendly way of knowing the identifier of the collection, as well as the current page of the collection’s view. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| Purpose: Ensuring that it is unambiguous yet user friendly way of knowing the identifier of the collection, as well as the current page of the collection’s view. | |
| Purpose: Ensuring that there is an unambiguous yet user friendly way of knowing the identifier of the collection, as well as the current page of the collection’s view. |
|
|
||
| Purpose: Ensuring that it is unambiguous yet user friendly way of knowing the identifier of the collection, as well as the current page of the collection’s view. | ||
|
|
||
| This test is about a function `initialization(url)`. The function will return a the collection and the URL of the root node. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| This test is about a function `initialization(url)`. The function will return a the collection and the URL of the root node. | |
| This test is about a function `initialization(url)`. The function will return the URL of the collection and the URL of the root node. |
|
|
||
| We’ll test this with various URLs containing different contents. | ||
|
|
||
| ### The URL to a rootnode without redirects ### {#1.1} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel like it could improve clarity to describe more extensively what the test should be testing. One way we could do that is by leveraging the test or it keywords commonly used by test frameworks:
| ### The URL to a rootnode without redirects ### {#1.1} | |
| ### Test if initializing with the URL to a rootnode without redirects returns the Collection URL and Root node URL ### {#1.1} |
or
| ### The URL to a rootnode without redirects ### {#1.1} | |
| ### It should return the Collection URL and Root node URL when initialising with the URL to a rootnode without redirects ### {#1.1} |
However we might not like it that the subtitles become very long, so an alternative idea could be to always include such a clear description right under the subtitle:
| ### The URL to a rootnode without redirects ### {#1.1} | |
| ### The URL to a rootnode without redirects ### {#1.1} | |
| **Test:** Initializing with the URL to a rootnode without redirects returns the Collection URL and Root node URL |
I think this might make things clearer for people that want to implement the test suite.
|
|
||
| ### The URL to a rootnode without redirects ### {#1.1} | ||
|
|
||
| File url `test1.1.ttl` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would consistently go for the uppercase URL throughout the spec
| File url `test1.1.ttl` | |
| File URL `test1.1.ttl` |
|
|
||
| ```turtle | ||
| @prefix tree: <https://w3id.org/tree#> . | ||
| <test1.2.ttl#collection> tree:view <test1.2.ttl> . |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think it is necessarily wrong, but wouldn't it be an idea to improve clarity by always using the uppercased<testX.X.ttl#Collection> for a Collection, instead of once <Collection> and the other time <test1.2.ttl#collection>. Similarly we could opt for <testX.X.ttl#Node> as Node URL, then we also test that it correctly returns the URL to the Node, and not just the URL to the RDF Document (as I think this is the intended behaviour).
Working on a proposal to add tests cases in the spec