- From: Alan Chuter <achuter@technosite.es>
- Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 10:14:22 +0100
- To: public-bpwg-pro@w3.org
Replying to myself, I also suggest that if the tests go beyond the BPs, it is a bad mistake to use the BP names for the tests, as it strongly gives the impression that the tests cover the BP. It might be better to give them numbers, and state within each what BP it relates to or is based on, or doesn't, without implying that they somehow match each other. That way we can test for things that are not in the BPs but should be. Unfortunately the Basic don't do this. for example, MINIMIZE [1] goes beyond the BP when it specifies a quantitative limit on whitespace, or STYLE_SHEETS_USE where it specifies the proscribed HTML elements and CSS features. These examples are probably not going to cause anyone real problems, but they do make for more confusion and work when using the document (I hear "If that's what they meant why didn't they say so before?"). The scope for doing this is very much greater in the Pro tests. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp/#MINIMIZE [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp/#STYLE_SHEETS_USE -- Alan Chuter, Senior Web Accessibility Consultant, Technosite (www.technosite.es) Researcher, Inredis Project (www.inredis.es/) Email: achuter@technosite.es Alternative email: achuter.technosite@yahoo.com Blogs: www.blogger.com/profile/09119760634682340619
Received on Wednesday, 20 February 2008 09:14:34 UTC