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: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 02:31:49 +0000 (UTC)
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Cc: WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0903070224160.2690@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Thu, 5 Mar 2009, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> Ian Hickson wrote:
> > 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
> 
> Ah, that wasn't the case last I checked.  And again, there's no 
> specification I can find that requires it.

WebIDL defines the class name and ECMAScript requires the [object foo] 
serialisation, if I'm not mistaken.

If I'm wrong and it's not required yet, then I guess I have a bug report 
for heycam. :-)


> > and I think there's no controversy over [002-002]
> 
> Probably not, though I suspect that Gecko won't implement this any time 
> soon; certainly not until WebIDL stabilizes more.  It requires some 
> pretty nontrivial changes.

For the Selectors API as far as I can tell it's trivial to implement, no? 
Just put the APIs on the other interfaces directly.



> > So since everyone is converging on the behaviour tested here, it 
> > should be pretty safe.
> 
> It depends on whether you want tests for behavior that UAs are 
> converging on or for behavior that the relevant specs actually require.

Technically, Selectors API does require these, no? I agree that for 
002-001 it's more implicit, but 002-002 and 002-003 are explicit.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 7 March 2009 02:32:27 GMT

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