On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Duncan Coutts
So in your other email you suggest a simple attribute system where we use a set of named tags, but with no meanings that a generic test agent will know about, just to be used as way for users to filter on tests.
Then here you've got a few suggestions for attributes with particular meanings to the test agent. Perhaps that kind of combination is enough, and we don't need anything to declare any kind of meaning. I think it's probably worth thinking about this part a bit more though.
I think widely used attribute such as 'size' should be fields in the record while more specific ones such as 'css-tests' should go into tags. If some attributes in tags turns out to be of general enough interest it could be promoted to a record field in a future API version. Johan