> -----Original Message----- > From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.barstow@nokia.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 3:40 AM > > Msger - Jungkee asked for your feedback below and again in <>. Would you > please followup? > > >> = interface.html > >> > >> tests 3,4,5 - none of the browsers pass this test but it's not really > >> clear to me what specific requirements from the spec are being tested > >> so at a minimum, some context for these tests should be added. > >> > > I think these assertions are valid in testing the enumerability and > > configurability of each of the attribute of ProgressEvent. Hence, I > > think they need to be treated as bugs but I also have a comment on this > test case: > > > > Ms2ger, > > > > - This test case doesn't take an assertion for writable attribute. > > Should the desc.writable be true or false? > > - Doesn't the assertion on configurable have to be > > assert_equals(desc.configurable, false) ? > > where configurable is, > > true if and only if the type of this property descriptor may be > > changed and if the property may be deleted from the corresponding object. > > Ms2ger? > The TC is valid. I've checked it from 4.4.6 attribute of WebIDL spec. The three attributes, "lengthComputable", "loaded" and "total", should have attributes [[Enumerable]]: true, [[Configurable]]: true. However, I don't know why but var desc = Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(ProgressEvent.prototype, a[1]); returns undefined in Chrome and raises an illegal operation runtime error in Firefox. Let me file the bug. > > >> test 6 - passes Opera and FF and fails Chrome. Not clear where the > >> "Interface objects propoerties should not be Enumerable" requirement > >> is defined. > >> > > Ms2ger, could you explain this? > > Based on Jungkee's followup, this is a Chrome bug. > > > >> test 7 - passed Opera and FF and fails Chrome > >> > > @Ms2ger, could you explain this? > > Ms2ger? > I've already confirmed it too: "Likewise, test 7 is for [[Configurable]]: true and thus valid. Failure on Chrome should be considered as a bug." Let me file this bug as well.Received on Thursday, 21 February 2013 11:20:16 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 21 February 2013 11:20:17 GMT