W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > October 2012

[Bug 14689] xml-stylesheet with type=text/xsl needs to be handled explicitly

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 22:07:26 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-14689-2486-Zg8xfL6LUf@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>

--- Comment #32 from Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk> ---
(In reply to comment #31)
> Henry, Norm: I'm happy to write the text that should go in the spec (and am
> indeed planning to do so — bug 17976 isn't closed)

Great, thanks

> but what I need before that can happen is the tests described in comment 8.

It's not laziness or disinclination that has lead to the lack of reply to
comment 8, but rather confusion.  Quoting from comment 8:

> testing what happens when the XML file or the XSL file (or both)
> are malformed

I can easily transform any or all of the tests already attached here to be
ill-formed in those ways, but I have no idea what kind of result report you
would need

> testing what happens with various MIME types for the XSL file

Can you point me to a parallel set of tests for xml-stylesheet type='text/css'
so I can see how you expect this to be done?

> testing whether the handling of this PI is blocking (by putting a
> <script> element in the source and having an XSL sheet where the
> server blocks so it takes a few seconds to download),

Not sure I have the necessary expertise to do this -- maybe Norm Walsh can help
here?  I recall recently running across a bunch of xsl-stylesheet tests you had
written, can't remember where, which might have begun to cover this???

> testing all the various attributes (e.g. are alternative style sheets
> honoured? What happens with multiple XSL links?), testing what happens
> when using <link> elements rather than XML PIs, etc.

Not sure this gives you enough to work with, but I've attached a further set of
tests in this space.  Note also Julian Reshke's offer at comment 7.

You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 11 October 2012 22:07:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:31:34 UTC