W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-mobileok-checker@w3.org > February 2007

Re: Some draft code for mobileOK Basic Tests RI

From: Roland Gülle <roland@7val.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 09:13:56 +0100
Message-Id: <55C96E6C-ADD3-4712-AA39-3FD2039927D9@7val.com>
Cc: public-mobileok-checker@w3.org
To: James G Pearce <jpearce@mtld.mobi>

> So then you can flip the question round. If you're building a meta- 
> doc for audit purposes anyway, why *wouldn't* you use it as the  
> test subject
You are right.
If we could build a meta-xml-doc that defines the test-runs (HTTP  
headers, document encoding, XPath Queries, image formats, ...) and  
the validator returns this xml doc with a result for each test run,  
the question about the implementation language is not important.

I think, the next step is to define this meta-xml-doc format and the  
test-run types (headers, encoding, XPath, ...) and discuss the test  

Received on Wednesday, 7 February 2007 08:14:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:21:17 UTC