Re: ACTION 515 -CSS stuff partially done

Also I see that the code that validates the XHTML uses a
<location>line, col</location> syntax. Mind if I update this too? I
think we need to get these details straightened out before we start
writing tests in earnest.

Sean

On 6/28/07, Sean Owen <srowen@google.com> wrote:
> 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 20:01:17 UTC