Closed woodbe closed 4 years ago
I am reviewing the toolbox overview and make comments to keep consistency between the overview and SD. My comments will be submitted soon (next week).
I think that it's better to review this PR after iTC formally agrees to make the PAD evaluation optional.
I'm not sure I agree that this needs to wait. I think the change here will be needed regardless of the PAD change since it was more about consistency in the description. It is OK to wait, but I don't see the need.
Based on comments by Mary Baisch this is intended to further clarify how the toolbox could be used as a basis for the creation of AVA_VAN tests while not being written for that purpose.
Also fixed a misspelling and added :icons: font line to the header.