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

Re: ACTION 515 -CSS stuff partially done

From: Sean Owen <srowen@google.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 15:49:33 -0400
Message-ID: <e920a71c0706281249k2cfd6d5dq8b5528eee659df95@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Abel Rionda" <abel.rionda@fundacionctic.org>
Cc: public-mobileok-checker@w3.org

Thoughts on this? I'd like to modify the <location> element naming to
be consistent with the result document naming.

I also believe we need to keep test-specific results out of the
intermediate doc - this "styleSheetSupport" element needs to be part
of the results instead of intermediate document I think.

On 6/26/07, Sean Owen <srowen@google.com> wrote:
> This is good stuff -- I have two comments on the result format.
>
> First would it be more desirable to re-use the <position> tag syntax
> that we conceived for the result document? this presents a similar,
> but different tag called <location>. We also used <info> rather than
> <description> in the results document.
>
> I remain a little concerned that the line between the "preprocessing"
> and "tests" is becoming blurred and the result will be difficult to
> comprehend. It makes sense to produce an intermediate document that
> records the result of accessing a CSS resource and even parsing it.
>
> Here I think we've gone a step beyond that and put mobileOK
> Basic-specific information into this document -- that is, which
> properties in the stylesheet aren't allowed by mobileOK Basic.
>
> I think this logic should be implemented only in the test and
> presented in the results document. Thoughts?
>
> On 6/26/07, Abel Rionda <abel.rionda@fundacionctic.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> >
> >
> > Although code in CVS is being updating with the new test format, we have
> > committed
> >
> > some changes related to our CSS action.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *We have introduced stylesheet block. So far this stylesheet tag can be
> > built from
> >
> >  linked  or embedded CSS Resources. In both cases W3CValidator will process
> > any
> >
> > @import rule found (But we lose the retrieval information of imported CSS).
> > So there will be
> >
> > an stylesheet block per top level CSS resource)
> >
> >
> >
> > *CSS validity messages from W3CValidator tool are allocated inside a
> > CSSValidity block with
> >
> > the same structure  used for grammar
> > validation.(error-location-description).
> >
> >
> >
> > *For each CSS test we have an special block with the information needed to
> > pass the test
> >
> > via XSLT. Currently we only have the information for Style Sheet Support
> > Test.
> >
> >
> >
> > To illustrate these changes see the following extract from moki document.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > <stylesheets>
> >
> >       <stylesheet type="embedded">
> >
> >
> > <URI>http://idi.fundacionctic.org/bk/google.xhtml</URI>
> >
> >          <CSSValidity valid="false">
> >
> >             <error code="-1">
> >
> >                <location type="LineAndColumn">1, 0</location>
> >
> >                <description>Property colo doesn't exist</description>
> >
> >             </error>
> >
> >          </CSSValidity>
> >
> >          <stylesheetSupportTest>
> >
> >             <error code="-1">
> >
> >                <location type="LineAndColumn">1, 0</location>
> >
> >                <description>float:left</description>
> >
> >             </error>
> >
> >          </stylesheetSupportTest>
> >
> >       </stylesheet>
> >
> >    </stylesheets>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2007 19:49:46 GMT

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