diff options
Diffstat (limited to '')
| -rw-r--r-- | testing/web-platform/tests/annotation-protocol/README.md | 86 |
1 files changed, 86 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/testing/web-platform/tests/annotation-protocol/README.md b/testing/web-platform/tests/annotation-protocol/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..d0ec93573f --- /dev/null +++ b/testing/web-platform/tests/annotation-protocol/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,86 @@ +Annotation-Protocol: Tests for the Web Annotation Protocol +========================================================== + +The [Web Annotation Protocol](https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-protocol) +specification presents set of messages to allow Annotation clients and servers +to interact seamlessly. + +The purpose of these tests is to help validate that clients send and are +capable of receiving correctly formatted messages, and that servers are +able to receive and respond to correctly structured requests. + +The general approach for this testing is to enable both manual and +automated testing. However, since the specification has no actual user +interface requirements, there is no general automation mechanism that +can be presented for testing clients. Also the server tests need to be +pointed at a server implementation to exercise. However, once provided +the basic information, testing is automated. + +Implementors could take advantage of the plumbing we provide here to +help their implementations talk to the endpoint we provide or exercise +their endpoint with the provided server tests. This assumes knowledge +of the requirements of each test / collection of tests so that the input +data is relevant. Each test or test collection contains information +sufficient for the task. + +With regard to server tests, the browser tests we provide can be +pointed at an endpoint and will exercise that endpoint using well +defined messages. This is done semi-automatically, although some set-up +is required. + +Running Tests +------------- + +In the case of this test collection, we will be initially creating manual +tests. These will automatically determine pass or fail and generate output for +the main WPT window. The plan is to minimize the number of such tests to +ease the burden on the testers while still exercising all the features. + +The workflow for running these tests is something like: + +1. Start up the test driver window and select the annotation-protocol tests - + either client or server - then click "Start". +2. A window pops up that shows a test - the description of which tells the + tester what is required. The window will contain fields into which some + information is provided. +3. In the case of client testing the tester (presumably in another window) brings up their + annotation client and points it at the supplied endpoint. They they perform the + action specified (annotating content in the test window, requesting an annotation from the server, etc.). +4. The server receives the information from the client, evaluates it, and reports the result of testing. + In the event of multi-step messages, the cycle repeats until complete. +5. Repeat steps 2-4 until done. +6. Download the JSON format report of test results, which can then be visually + inspected, reported on using various tools, or passed on to W3C for + evaluation and collection in the Implementation Report via github. + +**Remember that while these tests are written to help exercise implementations, +their other (important) purpose is to increase confidence that there are +interoperable implementations.** So, implementers are our audience, but these +tests are not meant to be a comprehensive collection of tests for an implementor. +The bulk of the tests are manual because there are no UI requirements in the +Recommendation that would make it possible to effectively stimulate every client portably. + +Having said that, because the structure of these "manual" tests is very rigid, +it is possible for an implementer who understands test automation to use an +open source tool such as [Selenium](http://www.seleniumhq.org/) to run these +"manual" tests against their implementation - exercising their implementation +against content they provide to create annotations and feed the data into our +test input field and run the test. + +Capturing and Reporting Results +------------------------------- + +As tests are run against implementations, if the results of testing are +submitted to [test-results](https://github.com/w3c/test-results/) then they will +be automatically included in documents generated by +[wptreport](https://www.github.com/w3c/wptreport). The same tool can be used +locally to view reports about recorded results. + +Automating Test Execution +------------------------- + +Writing Tests +------------- + +If you are interested in writing tests for this environment, see the +associated [CONTRIBUTING](CONTRIBUTING.md) document. |