W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > November 2014

Re: [whatwg] URL interop status and reference implementation demos

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2014 13:35:28 -0500
Message-ID: <5470D770.3000207@intertwingly.net>
To: Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me>
Cc: whatWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>


On 11/21/2014 05:32 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
> From: Sam Ruby [mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net]
>
>> I guess I didn't make the point clearly before.  This is not a
>> waterfall process where somebody writes down a spec and expects
>> implementations to eventually catch up.  That line of thinking
>> sometimes leads to browsers closing issues as WONTFIX.  For
>> example:
>>
>> https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=257354
>>
>> Instead I hope that the spec is open to change (and, actually, the
>> list of open bug reports is clear evidence that this is the case),
>> and that implies that "differing from the spec" isn't
>> isomorphically equal to "problematic case".  More precisely: it may
>> be the spec that needs to change.
>
> For sure! But, I would like to see where the spec differs from
> implementations, so that I can see what parts of the spec needs to be
> changed.
>
> Right now, when I read "user agents with differences: testdata chrome
> firefox ie" versus one that reads "user agents with differences: ie
> safari", I can't tell which user agents are aligned with the spec and
> which aren't. So I can't tell if the spec needs to change, or if it
> doesn't.
>
> I'd prefer some kind of view where it said "user agents with
> differences from the spec: x, y, z". Then if the answer was "chrome,
> firefox, ie" clearly the spec needs to change; if the answer was
> "chrome" then clearly Chrome needs to change and we can leave the
> spec alone.

Perhaps this is the view you are looking for?

http://w3c.github.io/test-results/url/all.html

Note that on that view you can click through to see how the user agent 
you are currently using differs from the spec.

> I'm gathering this is very different from the data the table is
> currently showing, but it seems I don't actually understand what the
> table is currently showing anyway, so I don't understand how I could
> use the table's current data to guide spec changes.

To reduce confusion, I've removed the list when there isn't consensus. 
I've also changed the colors on the browser-results page.

Green means all is good.

Yellow means that one or two browsers differ, and those are noted.

Red means that there isn't consensus.  I'm no longer showing which user 
agents differ.

If you drill down, I'm still showing "testdata" as a "user agent". 
"reference implementation" would be a better description.  I'll probably 
fix that later.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Saturday, 22 November 2014 18:35:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:09:32 UTC