Define and use standardized language for the conformance tests
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- TypeScript
- Stars
- 270
- Forks
- 194
- Avg merge
- 2d 13h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 36
Description
Minor Issue
As discussed in #1426 the conformance tests all have different language, which I think would be nice to standardize.
Examples include using "App A does" or "App A can" or "B should" sometimes in the same test suit.
It is not a big issue so maybe if the tests are going to completely change, then we won't need it at all.
Area of Issue
- App Directory
- API
- Context Data
- Intents
- Desktop Agent Bridging
- Use Cases
- Other
Issue Description:
Standard language will make the test definitions in fdc3-conformance folder more readable
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start in the fdc3-conformance folder and read the discussion in issue #1426 to understand the proposed test changes and language conventions. Review the existing conformance test definitions, identify inconsistent phrasing such as “App A does,” “App A can,” and “B should,” and standardize it across the applicable tests. Done means the definitions use consistent language, unless the planned test redesign makes this work unnecessary.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- typescript
- Domain
- testing
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 38/100