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

Re: ACTION 515 -New CSS approach

From: Sean Owen <srowen@google.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 10:39:17 -0400
Message-ID: <e920a71c0707090739l68a7a920w56da704a26de4dce@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Jo Rabin" <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
Cc: public-mobileok-checker <public-mobileok-checker@w3.org>
I won't be around tomorrow for the call, but if we're not going all
the way to a full CSS-in-XML representation (and I think that's a bit
much here), which would achieve a goal of reusability, then we should
go all the way towards simplicity, and simply include the text
representation of the CSS in the moki document and leave it at that.

I don't have a problem with Java code in XSLT. Some amount is already
unavoidable. We already have to have a function to test free-form CSS
in style attributes, which presumably translates easily to parsing a
CSS stylesheet.

Because our needs are in fact very simple, and don't require a
structured representation, I suggest we keep it simple and not try to
concoct a partially-structured representation. Unless I am missing
something, the simple approach is entirely sufficient for our needs.

Sean

On 7/9/07, Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi> wrote:
>
> I don't particularly see a problem with having the CSS results in the moki document - though I do agree with the point about not wanting this to be an established part of moki - so we could have a teeny namespace within which to put such things?
>
> I don't think that standardising as part of moki a limited CSS-in-XML format as such a good idea.
>
> All in all, I don't think there is a good answer to this problem ... I would on balance prefer to do a full CSS in XML, but then you'd all probably expect me to say that :-)
>
> Jo
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-mobileok-checker-request@w3.org [mailto:public-mobileok-
> > checker-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Miguel Garcia
> > Sent: 09 July 2007 14:11
> > To: public-mobileok-checker
> > Subject: RE: ACTION 515 -New CSS approach
> >
> >
> > When dealing with CSS tests we have two options, doing the test in
> > Preprocessor class (as validation is done) or trying to make the test by
> > an XSLT.
> >
> > Our first approach was adding a element to moki with the result of
> > performing the test (StyleSheetSupport) during preprocesing. This approach
> > has its flaws mainly adding an specific mobileok test result to moki (as
> > we hope moki could be used for other tools not only mobileOk checker).
> >
> > The other option passes through getting an CSS representation in XML, not
> > necessary an "exact" representation but an "equivalent" one that is
> > suitable for doing the tests. We have committed this early implementation
> > to discuss.
> >
> > A Java function called from XSLT is an option (perhaps the best) for
> > inline styles but not for style blocks (style tag and linked stylesheets).
> >
> > Also using a lot of Java functions from XSLT will make us more dependant
> > to the XSLT library.
> >
> > Miguel
> >
> > >>-----Mensaje original-----
> > >>De: public-mobileok-checker-request@w3.org [mailto:public-mobileok-
> > >>checker-request@w3.org] En nombre de Sean Owen
> > >>Enviado el: sábado, 07 de julio de 2007 23:27
> > >>Para: Abel Rionda
> > >>CC: public-mobileok-checker@w3.org
> > >>Asunto: Re: ACTION 515 -New CSS approach
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>At a high level, I don't understand why we need to do much of anything
> > >>with CSS. We record the retrieval of the CSS document and its
> > >>contents, and some information about syntax errors. That's all we
> > >>need.
> > >>
> > >>The only tests we conduct on CSS then look for absolute units of
> > >>measure, which is almost just regular expression matching, does not
> > >>need to be conducted in preprocessing, and is easily implemented in
> > >>Java.
> > >>
> > >>What is the need then for CSS-in-XML or anything this complicated? I
> > >>remain concerned about how much complexity is increasing here.
> > >>
> > >>Sean
> > >>
> > >>On 7/6/07, Abel Rionda <abel.rionda@fundacionctic.org> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> This is a summary of what we  have already committed regarding CSS
> > >>stuff:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> *So far, what was previously committed in CVS was explained in
> > >>>
> > >>>  a mail some days ago but the main points were:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>             -Java classes for represent CSS resources.
> > >>>
> > >>>             -Representation in moki of CSS validation info.
> > >>>
> > >>>             -Representation in moki of CSS test specific info.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> *As Sean said, the last point was not very correct (having an
> > >>intermediate
> > >>>
> > >>> doc with mobileOK test specific info) so we tried to proceed with
> > using
> > >>java
> > >>>
> > >>> functions from XSLT (similar approach to Caching test).
> > >>>
> > >>> But we desisted from this approach because Java functions would not
> > >>return
> > >>> primitives
> > >>>
> > >>> types but blocks of XML result code, which it is not a very good
> > >>solution.
> > >>>
> > >>> In addition tests classes would need visibility of PreprocessorResults
> > >>to
> > >>> extract CSS info
> > >>>
> > >>> (what is not contained in moki)
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> *So this week, we (basically Miguel) go on with another different
> > >>approach
> > >>> to fulfil
> > >>>
> > >>> this problem. This is a pseudo serialization of CSS in XML in the
> > >>following
> > >>> format:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>             <styles>
> > >>>
> > >>>             <style>
> > >>>
> > >>>                <selector>a:link</selector>
> > >>>
> > >>>                <property name="color">rgb(0, 0, 204)</property>
> > >>>
> > >>>             </style>
> > >>>
> > >>>             <style>
> > >>>
> > >>>                <selector>a:visited</selector>
> > >>>
> > >>>                <property name="color">rgb(0, 0, 204)</property>
> > >>>
> > >>>             </style>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>       </styles>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> And we have modified MeasuresTest and StylesheetsSupportTest to deal
> > >>with
> > >>>
> > >>> this approach and also in order to use the new result template.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Any feedback on this will be welcome. J
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> CTIC team
> >
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 9 July 2007 14:39:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:03 GMT