W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2009

Re: Call for Consensus - Selectors API to Candidate Rec

From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 14:07:49 +0100
Message-ID: <49941F25.1030706@lachy.id.au>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Cc: WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>

Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
> In addition, since this specification has a number of implementations we 
> may try to have a zero-length CR period (by approving tests and showing 
> that we have interoperability already) - any comments on that approach 
> are welcome.

Based on John Resig's tests [1], I believe we have at least 2 
interoperable implementations that pass the Selectors API conformance 
requirements.  (At least Opera and WebKit).

I think the remaining failing tests are related to Selectors, rather 
than the API.  In particular, Opera has some issues with substring 
attribute selectors matching empty strings, and the :enabled, :disabled 
and :checked pseudo-classes, and WebKit has some issues with Selector 
syntax and the :target pseudo-class.

Firefox appears to have some issues that might related to the API, 
though I haven't investigated the cause of those yet, so I don't know 
for sure.  Unfortunately, IE8 can't run John's tests because it relies 
on some DOM2 features that aren't yet supported, so the testing 
framework would need to be rewritten to make it work.

I think if we incorporate those with my own tests, as well as the tests 
Microsoft previously offered [2] (but which I haven't yet received), 
then we should be able to organise an official test suite relatively 
quickly.

[1] http://ejohn.org/apps/selectortest/#target
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/0347.html

-- 
Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
http://lachy.id.au/
http://www.opera.com/
Received on Thursday, 12 February 2009 13:08:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:30 GMT