W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: [selectors-api] Transitioning to CR

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:58:17 -0400
Message-Id: <1E6F817B-38F6-4DFE-8DC6-00DE34DBFA54@nokia.com>
Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
To: ext Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
Lachlan,

On Jun 17, 2009, at 8:15 AM, ext Lachlan Hunt wrote:

> Hi,
>    In order to complete the transition of Selectors API to CR, there
> were a number of things that needed to be done, following the call for
> consensus we had in April/May.
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009AprJun/ 
> 0471.html
>
> 1. Write CR Exit Criteria

I think your proposal is OK.

> 2. Write updated Status of the Document section

Other than a date or two that will need to be updated before  
publication, I think your proposal is OK.

> 3. Complete the test suite

...

> *Test Suite*
>
> Finally, there were a number of additional tests that needed to be
> reviewed and either incorporated into the test suite, or rejected.
>
> 1. Erik proposed additional tests related to using Selectors API with
> SVG content.  His proposal would add SVG directly into the existing  
> test
> suite file.  However, as the existing file is HTML, not XHTML, this  
> will
> not work in current browsers, and would instead require the tests  
> to be
> in a separate XHTML file.
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/ 
> 0788.html

I would be interested in getting feedback from implementors about  
whether or not these additional tests should be mandatory.


> 2. Hixie proposed two sets of tests.  The first seems to be
> non-controversial and I believe it should be integrated into the  
> test suite.
>
> http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/dom/selectors/001.html

OK.


> Based on past discussion, however, the second set is somewhat
> controversial, and I'm not really sure whether or not they should be
> included.
>
> http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/dom/selectors/002.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/ 
> 0637.html

In the absence of strong support for adding this second set, perhaps  
they should not be included.


> 3. The missing tests that I pointed out relating to the namespace  
> syntax
> do need to be included, as they will test specific conformance
> requirements in Selectors API that are currently not tested in the  
> test
> suite.
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/ 
> 0713.html
>
> Additionally, in order to make the tests easier to count, I think we
> should consider grouping the tests according to the level of Selectors
> used for a given test, so that tests using CSS2 Selectors can be  
> easily
> distinguished from those using Selectors Level 3.  In particular, this
> would make assessing IE's conformance easier since they don't claim to
> support many level 3 selectors and those tests shouldn't be counted.
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/ 
> 0585.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/ 
> 0586.html
>
> I will work in John Resig to get those tests integrated into the test
> suite soon.

Good. Please let us know when this is completed.

-Regards, Art Barstow
Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2009 12:59:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:31 GMT