Re: ACVC tests

[john@assen.demon.co.uk (John McCabe)]

dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wrote:

>Of course the team has not "contacted most users", who would number in
>the tens of thousands. In fact the experience in the past has been that,
>although the ACVC tests were generally available for review, it has been
>extremely difficult to get ANY tecnical input from anyone. Even vendors
>do not in general look at the tests in advance of the formal release
>of the suite, and it is extremely rare to get any technical input from
>users on the tests (I can't remember any example of such). Thus the
>phiolosophy behind the committee was precisely to get at least *some*
>users, implementors and testers looking at the test carefully in advance.

I am surprised that the vendors attitude here since one would have
thought they would be keen to be the first on the market with a
validated product.

Perhaps this attitude should be considered further. It may be, for
example, that they consider validation as a hinderance that does not
add any real value to their product. It could then be suggested that
this attitude is promoted by the users (like myself, or the mandators
like Dornier) not being strict enough with the vendors and asking for
VSRs and ACES results etc.

Any comments?

In general, however, I applaud your attempts here to extract more
detailed comments from users on the new test suite and, when I have
time, I'll see if I can be of any help!


Best Regards
John McCabe <john@assen.demon.co.uk>