Re: Notice of two CFC

The implementation reports were generated manually since we need OS-level
keyboard events to be injected in order to test this feature and that is
not supported in WPTs (when I last checked).

However, we do have some automation scripts that we can adapt to produce an
automated test. I'll work on that and regenerate the reports.

Thanks for the feedback.


On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 2:18 AM, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk> wrote:

> Thanks Florian. Good suggestions. It was problems with the implimentation
> reports that caused us to pull the CFC, so this is useful feebdack.
>
>
>
> On 02/03/2018 03:00, Florian Rivoal wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Please respond to these CFC by the end of Monday 5th March 2018.
>>>
>>> Move UI Events Keyboard Events Key Values to Proposed Recommendation
>>> (PR):
>>> https://github.com/w3c/uievents-key/issues/47
>>>
>>> Move UI Events Keyboard Events Code Values to PR:
>>> https://github.com/w3c/uievents-code/issues/22
>>>
>>
>> Since the CFC has been rescinded, this isn't a vote, but here's a quick
>> comment about what would be good to see when the CFC is restarted:
>>
>> * Both implementation reports list test results, but do not link to test
>> files. Please indicate which test files were used to produce these results,
>> at least by pointing to the test suite, and preferably by linking each
>> entry in the result tables to the corresponding test. If no such tests
>> currently exist, they should be written, so that the results can be
>> independently verified without any doubts as to the methodology. Phrasing
>> like the following would be appreciated:
>>
>> The [test suite](link) for [sec name](link) is considered to be complete
>>> with no known or suspected bugs at the time of its publication. This report
>>> was prepared using the tests and their results as of March 12 2018. If you
>>> find any errors, would like to contribute additional tests, or have other
>>> feedback, please report it on the [Web Platform Test github project](
>>> https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/) or to the archived public
>>> discussion mailing list for the  Web Platform Working Group,
>>> public-webapps@w3.org.
>>>
>>
>> * Hopefully, automated tests are possible. If not (e.g. because of the
>> need to press physical keys), bugs should be filed against WebPlatformTests
>> and/or WebDriver asking to make this possible. Until then, we should still
>> have manual tests files (e.g. manual instructions to press a specific key +
>> a piece of javascript checking that the correct values are set in the
>> corresponding event(s)).
>>
>> * In the results, please distinguish (maybe by using "Fail" vs "N/A")
>> within the cases currently described as "No" those where the wrong key
>> values or code values get sent from those where nothing gets sent at all,
>> either because the key doesn't exist physically or because not event gets
>> fired making the key values or code impossible to observe.
>>
>> * I suggest renaming "Yes" to "Pass"
>>
>> * Please include a summary of the results. Here is a suggested phrasing:
>>
>> All 1234 tests for mandatory normative statements pass in at least two
>>> independent implementations.
>>>
>>> The Candidate Recommendation exit criteria are therefore fulfilled.
>>>
>>> Also, 56 of the 78 tests for optional normative statements pass in at
>>> least two independent implementations.
>>>
>>
>> * For all entries with less than 2 "Yes"/"Pass", if any, and especially
>> those with 0 "Yes"/"Pass", please state why it is judged acceptable to move
>> to PR anyway. See this section from the CSS-UI implementation report for an
>> example https://drafts.csswg.org/css-ui-3/implementation-report#analysis
>>
>> Thanks,
>> —Florian
>>
>> On Feb 26, 2018, at 19:32, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> Please respond to these CFC by the end of Monday 5th March 2018.
>>>
>>> Move UI Events Keyboard Events Key Values to Proposed Recommendation
>>> (PR):
>>> https://github.com/w3c/uievents-key/issues/47
>>>
>>> Move UI Events Keyboard Events Code Values to PR:
>>> https://github.com/w3c/uievents-code/issues/22
>>>
>>> If you support either of these proposals, add a "thumbs up" to the first
>>> comment on each issue. If you do not support either of these proposals, add
>>> a "thumbs down" to the first comment and provide your reasons in another
>>> comment.
>>>
>>> If you do not respond it will be taken as silent support for the
>>> proposal. Actual responses are preferred though, not least because it lets
>>> the editors working on these specifications know you've taken an interest.
>>>
>>>
>>> -- @LeonieWatson @tink@toot.cafe Carpe diem
>>>
>>>
>>
> --
> @LeonieWatson @tink@toot.cafe Carpe diem
>
>