New draft of mobileOK Basic 1zq (draft 43) - preview of PR draft

Further to the exchange on STYLE_SHEETS_USE on the Comments and Checker 
lists please find another draft at:

http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/Drafts/mobileOK-Basic-1.0-Tests/080707

and a diff to the LC-4 Editor's draft at (sorry, TinyURL not working today)

http://www.w3.org/2007/10/htmldiff?doc1=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2005%2FMWI%2FBPWG%2FGroup%2FDrafts%2FmobileOK-Basic-1.0-Tests%2F080606&doc2=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2005%2FMWI%2FBPWG%2FGroup%2FDrafts%2FmobileOK-Basic-1.0-Tests%2F080707

and a diff to draft 1zp at

http://www.w3.org/2007/10/htmldiff?doc1=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2005%2FMWI%2FBPWG%2FGroup%2FDrafts%2FmobileOK-Basic-1.0-Tests%2F080704&doc2=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2005%2FMWI%2FBPWG%2FGroup%2FDrafts%2FmobileOK-Basic-1.0-Tests%2F080707

I very much hope that this is the last draft so we can agree to proceed 
on Thursday's call.

Jo


On 04/07/2008 14:06, Jo Rabin wrote:
> 
> Thanks again to Rotan for picking up my mistake on the formatting of the 
>  Object Element Processing Rule, annoying, especially since I had asked 
> you all to look at it very carefully. Sigh. Festina Lente.
> 
> So I have spent this morning chastising myself, and (perhaps more 
> usefully) tightening up on the notion of Included Resources and which 
> tests apply to them. This has meant some reasonably substantial (but not 
> substantive) changes. I've also changed the wording of the Object 
> Processing Rule once again to try to clarify it. In addition there is 
> some tidying up of grammatical agreement, capitalization and so on.
> 
> I hesitate to say this, in view of yesterday's debacle, but please check 
> this all out carefully. It is very difficult to review one's own text 
> and not read into it what one meant to say, irrespective of what it 
> actually says.
> 
> You will find the latest offering at
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/Drafts/mobileOK-Basic-1.0-Tests/080704 
> 
> 
> the diff to the LC-4 Editors draft at
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/5jgu2q
> 
> and the diff to yesterday's offering at
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/5q5lpg
> 
> 
> Jo
> 
> 
> 
> On 04/07/2008 00:54, Jo Rabin wrote:
>>
>> Oh dear. Thanks Rotan, and I have spotted some other bugs. The fateful 
>> draft 42 to come tomorrow ... when I have thought about it a bit more.
>>
>> On 03/07/2008 19:04, Rotan Hanrahan wrote:
>>> I have looked at the object element processing rule at [1] and I believe
>>> I can follow what is intended, but unfortunately the indenting (which
>>> represents the scope of operations in some cases) seems a little broken.
>>>
>>> ---Rotan
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/Drafts/mobileOK-Basic-1.0-Tests/08
>>> 0703#ObjectElementProcessingRule
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: public-bpwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Jo Rabin
>>> Sent: 03 July 2008 17:44
>>> To: MWI BPWG Public
>>> Subject: New draft of mobileOK Basic 1zo (draft 41) - preview of PR
>>> draft
>>>
>>>
>>> I've posted a new version of mobileOK Basic Tests at
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/Drafts/mobileOK-Basic-1.0-Tests/08
>>> 0703
>>>
>>> Differences from LC-4 Editors Draft: http://tinyurl.com/5bly2q
>>>
>>> I intend to make some further minor tweaks to correct punctuation and 
>>> some wording but they can wait. Please review this draft and in 
>>> particular give your consideration to the Object Processing Rule 
>>> which has been such a headache.
>>>
>>> Also I think
>>> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Remove Appendix C
>>> as it is now superfluous.
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> Jo
>>>
>>>
>>> [principal changes]
>>>
>>> Corrections as noted by Francois when posting previous draft into TR
>>> space.
>>>
>>> Removal of reference to mobileOK Pro in Appendix C
>>>
>>> Removal of reference to mobileOK Pro in section 1 and renaming of
>>> section 1.1 and 1.1.1
>>>
>>> Corrections to Object Processing and HTTP Response as noted by Dom 
>>> and Francois and as noted by me on the public-bpwg-comment list.
>>>
>>> Changes to clarify the difference between type attribute, Internet Media
>>>
>>> Type and Presentation Media Type.
>>>
>>
>

Received on Monday, 7 July 2008 09:41:49 UTC