W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: CfC - publish Selectors API as CR

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 17:52:21 +0100
To: "Lachlan Hunt" <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.u30g5jr4wxe0ny@widsith.local>
On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:58:56 +0100, Lachlan Hunt  
<lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au> wrote:

> Lachlan Hunt wrote:
>> There must be at least two complete, independent implementations, each
>> of which must pass 100% of the baseline testsuite and should pass
>> additional tests, dependent on the following conditions:
>> ...
>> The current state of implementations is as follows:
>> Minefield:
>> Baseline Tests: HTML/CSS2.1: PASS
>> Additional Tests: HTML/CSS3: PASS
>> Additional Tests: XHTML+SVG/CSS3: PASS
>> Opera gogi (Internal build)
>> Baseline Tests: HTML/CSS2.1: PASS
>> Additional Tests: HTML/CSS3: FAIL 4 (non-API bugs)
>> Additional Tests: XHTML+SVG/CSS3: FAIL 22 (non-API bugs)
>> ...
>> With Minefield and BlackBerry, we have two complete implementations
>> passing everything. Opera's results also meet the above criteria, so
>> that gives us 3 implementations.
> Actually, correction.  Minefield and Opera don't meet the condition if  
> we keep the shipping requirement in the exit criteria.  But as soon as  
> either of those builds make it into release products, we'll be good to  
> go.  Alternatively, we could just say public development builds are good  
> enough, and Minefield would count, but I don't see any problem with just  
> waiting.

And I don't see any problem with using public development builds.




Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Thursday, 26 November 2009 16:53:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:21 UTC