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

Re: MobileOK comments

From: Johannes Koch <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:50:38 +0200
Message-ID: <4715CCDE.9000002@fit.fraunhofer.de>
To: ERT WG <public-wai-ert@w3.org>

Shadi Abou-Zahra schrieb:
>  - <http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-mobileOK-basic10-tests-20070928/>

Here are my comments on the recent mobileOK Basic WD:

section 2.4.2

* in Note: "have the have either the" -> "have either the"


section 2.4.3

* The algorithm does specify whether tests have to be carried out on 
responses with 3xx, 401, 404, 407 and 5xx status codes. Is does _not_ 
specify whether tests have to be carried out on responses with 1xx, 2xx 
and 4xx (other than 401, 404 and 407).

It does specifiy whether the resource size/count totals have to be 
updated for 3xx, 401, 407 status codes. Is does _not_ specify whether 
the resource size/count totals have to be updated for 1xx, 2xx, 4xx 
(other than 401 and 407) and 5xx status codes.


section 2.4.5

* Are values "all" and "handheld" meant case-insensitively?

* Are "stylesheet" and "alternate" meant case-insensitively?

* Is "UTF-8" meant case-insensitively?


section 2.4.6

* While section 2.4.7 lists element/attribute combinations (e.g. href 
attribute of a element), section 2.4.6 does not provide attributes for 
the elements:
   * img elements (src attribute?)
   * object elements (data attribute? some special param, e.g. value
     attribute of param element with name="src"?
   * link elements and xml-stylesheet processing instructions (href
     (pseudo-) attribute?)

* Are values "all" and "handheld" meant case-insensitively?


section 2.4.7

* "GET" -> "get" Or is it meant case-insensitively.


section 2.4.8

* " CSS

     A resource is considered a valid CSS resource if it conforms to the 
grammar defined in [CSS], Appendix B (see note below).

     Note:

     The presence of at-rules, properties or values or combinations of 
properties and values that are not specified in [CSS] does not 
constitute a validity failure for CSS. See 3.21 STYLE_SHEETS_USE for 
treatment of such values. In addition, the @media at-rule and the 
presentation media qualifiers for the @import at-rule are taken into 
account when evaluating CSS."

This is a contradiction: The CSS1 grammar does not allow at-rules other 
than @import. How about the following wording (if that's what you mean)?

"A resource is considered a valid CSS resource if it conforms to the 
grammar defined in [CSS], Appendix B, apart from possible uses of @media 
at-rules with optional presentation media qualifiers."


section 3.2

* "If the HTTP response contains neither an Expires nor Cache-Control 
header"
missing "nor Pragma"?


section 3.4

* "In the following, an "html document" is a document that has "html" as 
its root element."
Are there any restrictions on the html element's namespace URI 
(http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml)?


section 3.5

* "For each input element with attribute type whose value is "text" or 
"password""
Does a missing type attribute in the markup assume the default value 
"text" as per the document type definition?


section 3.6

* "FAILures that occur in the course of making this assessment 
contribute to the result of this test."
Do these FAILures count as EXTERNAL_RESOURCES-1 _and_ http_response-x?


section 3.10

* "If the Content-Type header value of the HTTP response is not 
consistent with the Accept-Charset header in 2.4.2 HTTP Request, warn"
What to do here if there is no charset parameter in the Content-Type header?


section 3.15

* "If the innermost nested object element content consists only of white 
space (see 2.4.9 White Space), FAIL"
"consists" -> "contains"?


section 3.21

* "If the CSS Style contains a property with a value that is 
inappropriate to it, warn

If the CSS Style contains a property with a value that requires a unit 
or a percentage:

If the unit (or percentage) is not present, warn

If the unit (or percentage) is inappropriate to the value, warn"

Does this only apply to properties specified in CSS1? Do newer 
properties have to be ignored here?


section 3.22/23/24

* "If a table element exists," -> "For each table element"?
Otherwise there would be at most one message for 
"TABLES_ALTERNATIVES-1", "TABLES_LAYOUT-1", "TABLES_LAYOUT-2", 
"TABLES_LAYOUT-3" and "TABLES_NESTED-1"
-- 
Johannes Koch
BIKA Web Compliance Center - Fraunhofer FIT
Schloss Birlinghoven, D-53757 Sankt Augustin, Germany
Phone: +49-2241-142628    Fax: +49-2241-142065
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2007 08:51:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:29 GMT