W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert@w3.org > February 2007

Re: Summary of comment on Mobile OK Basic draft

From: Johannes Koch <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 09:32:02 +0100
Message-ID: <45D56C02.8010203@fit.fraunhofer.de>
To: public-wai-ert@w3.org

Carlos Iglesias schrieb:
> 2.3.3 HTTP Response
> 
> "If an HTTP request fails for any reason during a test (network-level error, DNS resolution error, non-HTTP response, or server returns an HTTP 4xx or 5xx status), the test outcome should be considered FAIL"
> 
> When not reaching the server it should be a not tested instead a fail (e.g 5xx server errors).

Why is 5xx is mentioned here?

> When the server returns 4xx or 5xx the result of the test should not fail, because otherwise the website as a hole could never be Mobile OK compliant (e.g. you can always make a request that will produce an 404 and thus a fail)


> 2.4 CONTENT_FORMAT_SUPPORT
> 
> "If the response specifies an Internet media type that is not "text/css", "image/jpeg" or "image/gif", FAIL"
> 
> Why are image/png or application/svg+xml not included in DDC (default definition context)?

It's default _delivery_ context.

> 3.15 OBJECTS_OR_SCRIPT
> 
> "If the value of the href attribute begins with the "javascript:" scheme, FAIL"
> 
> At least, href attributes with "#" value should also fail.
> A wider definition which discourages not valid href values in general would be desirable.

Again: what is 'not valid'? According to XHTML (DTD validity), the value 
of href attributes is just CDATA. According to the specification prose 
it must be a URI. Do we propose to use only URI schemes registered with 
IANA?

-- 
Johannes Koch - Competence Center BIKA
Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology (FIT.LIFE)
Schloss Birlinghoven, D-53757 Sankt Augustin, Germany
Phone: +49-2241-142628    Fax: +49-2241-142065
Received on Friday, 16 February 2007 08:32:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:28 GMT