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

Re: [Selectors API] Call for Consensus - approve John Resig's tests

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 02:25:12 +0000 (UTC)
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Cc: WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0903050220510.2690@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Wed, 4 Mar 2009, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> Ian Hickson wrote:
> >    http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/dom/selectors/002.html
> 
> Given the state of WebIDL, it's not clear to me that the test 002 of 
> this test is necessarily required by the spec as it stands.

Yeah, that's why I separated those tests out.

However, I don't think the things tested in 002 are controversal. In 
particular, all the UAs have converged on the behaviour tested by 002-001 
for other objects, 002-002 is explicitly required by the IDL block in 
Selectors API and I think there's no controversy over that particular 
requirement, and 002-003 is a bog-standard DOM test of one of the 
requirements in the Selectors API that doesn't really depend on WebIDL at 
all. So since everyone is converging on the behaviour tested here, it 
should be pretty safe.


> For that matter, it's not clear to me that test 001 is.

Why not? I think everything in 001 is non-controversal and tests only 
things that are required by Selectors API, no?

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 5 March 2009 02:25:47 GMT

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