Remove expected output from date/time formatter tests

[catamorphism]

Per discussion on #759 , this PR removes expected output for :date, :time, and :datetime, except for error cases (since fallback handling is part of the spec).

Also added a note in the README to explain that.

I didn't remove the expected output for :number/:integer test cases, since that seems less likely to vary? But perhaps that should be done as well.

[eemeli]

Could include a Prettier formatting run of the changed files, to prevent them being reformatted later.

[aphillips]

Looks good. Might be nice to convert the exp that were removed to comments, though.

[macchiati]

One thought. Could retain the data, and document in the header that conformance doesn't require exactly the same value. Non-cldr implementations can test simply that a value is produced.

…

On Sat, Apr 6, 2024, 08:36 Addison Phillips ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** approved this pull request. Looks good. Might be nice to convert the exp that were removed to comments, though. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#760 (review)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACJLEMHM7LIZA2FTNZYQWELY4AB7RAVCNFSM6AAAAABFZ4NIMCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMYTSOBUGU3DSOBZHA> . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[aphillips]

One thought. Could retain the data, and document in the header that
conformance doesn't require exactly the same value. Non-cldr
implementations can test simply that a value is produced.

CLDR ones too. Date/time formats evolve over time; a good set of tests probably encompasses many locales and the full option set.

There should probably be some text about testing that says, effectively, "insert your platform integration tests here"

[macchiati]

I agree that conformance needs to have tests that are very flexible. But we can also generate version-specific test data for those implementations using CLDR data. Even if the implementation patches CLDR data, those can be pretty valuable to have, because they can often still use the tests with some adjustments, because they know the patches that they make to CLDR data. (I can elaborate more later.) Anyway, not at all a blocker for tech review, of course.

…

On Sat, Apr 6, 2024 at 10:00 AM Addison Phillips ***@***.***> wrote: One thought. Could retain the data, and document in the header that conformance doesn't require exactly the same value. Non-cldr implementations can test simply that a value is produced. CLDR ones too. Date/time formats evolve over time; a good set of tests probably encompasses many locales and the full option set. There should probably be some text about testing that says, effectively, "insert your platform integration tests here" — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#760 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACJLEMGBDNMMM6IVKFPQLG3Y4ASZVAVCNFSM6AAAAABFZ4NIMCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDANBRGEZTQMZQHE> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>