W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom-ts@w3.org > August 2001

Re: [General] Status?

From: Mary Brady <mbrady@nist.gov>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 12:02:28 -0400
Message-ID: <002001c120ec$b011ece0$293b0681@HAPPY>
To: "Dimitris Dimitriadis" <dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se>, <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
Comments inlined.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Dimitris Dimitriadis" <dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se>
To: "'Curt Arnold'" <carnold@houston.rr.com>; <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 11:39 AM
Subject: SV: [General] Status?

> comments inlined
> -----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
> Från: Curt Arnold [mailto:carnold@houston.rr.com]
> Skickat: den 9 augusti 2001 17:29
> Till: www-dom-ts@w3.org
> Ämne: Re: [General] Status?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dimitris Dimitriadis" <dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se>
> To: "Dimitris Dimitriadis" <dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se>;
> <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 7:07 AM
> Subject: SV: [General] Status?
> > I'm back from my vacation and would like to do a quick check on the
> > list posted earlier and listed below.
> >
> > I think we are ready to move quite fast toward publishing the DOM TS if
> > allow for the following:
> >
> > 1. Some period to sanity check and edit existing transforms and build
> files.
> I don't expect the Java transform to be perfect, however I think that when
> we start to walk through the NIST contributed tests, we will quickly
> identify latent issues.
> I have worked a little on a ECMAScript transform but haven't written
> supporting code to run the few tests that I have generated.

[mb] We have an ECMAScript transform from a derivative Schema -- some minor
mod's that were made to one of Curt's earlier versions -- I don't think it
will serve
as the transform, but it may be useful to see the less than polished code
that is
generated -- the tests seem to run in both IE and Mozilla using this
harness --
I'll have to look into making it available.  It may provide some starting

> Haven't done anything on Python.
> [dd] We'll definitely allow some time to tweak the transforms if needed
> we have the test files ready.
> > 2. A general discussion as to whether ANT will be used as the primary
> > for builds.
> I thought it was the most appropriate tool.  What alternatives would you
> like to suggest?
> [dd] none, it was merely a comment aimed at raising a discussion if anyone
> feels we should have another tool. ANT works fine for me, besides we can
> really use any tool we like for building the TS before packaging it.
[mb] Ant works for me, but it is not trivial to get ant, cvs, the
appropriate parsers,
xslt processor, etc working together.  Some documentation would sure help!

> > 3. A general discussion as to whether people wanting to download the
> > themselves should be able to do this to both build the DOM TS as well as
> > write their own harness around it.
> The W3C CVS has anonymous read-access so unless we intentionally want to
> prevent people from accessing the source, they are technically capable of
> doing it.  Since the most significant audience for the test source and
> harnesses are parser authors, I don't think that it is necessary to
> an easier way to get at the source.
> [dd] The DOM WG expressed the wish to
> 1. have a simple harness around the tests, for example for on-line
> using ECMA script
> 2. be able to write your own harness around the tests
> I believed this is allowed by the license as it was finalized, correct me
> I'm wrong.
> The standoff over using the W3C Software License was explicitly to allow
> legitimate deriviative works.  I only made my contributions after I
> this issue was resolved.  Reversing that decision and making the tests or
> harness non-public would be detrimental to the effectiveness of the suite
> and would do seriously bad things to my attitude.
> [dd] Nothing in the development of the DOM TS will be non-public, so I
> see there is any reason to worry. Given that people will be able to
> the tests from the CVS, they may also want to write the harness around it.
> One way of going about is to just inform on what files are definitely
> needed, then let people do what they want.
> > 4. Release of NIST tests, sanity check, editing, being done.
> I understand NIST's desire not to publish anything that isn't almost
> perfect.  But it is impossible to determine any coverage issues and
> discourages anyone else from trying to contribute tests until the NIST
> are committed to the CVS (which will hopefully happen shortly).
> [dd] I agree, I believe we will be able to go into sanity checking phase
> quite soon.
[mb] Not sure what you mean here -- our less than perfect tests are and
have been available for some time.  The tests have been modified, but have
not all been translated and compiled.  I would expect that any contribution
not be accepted until it met this minimum requirement.

> > 5. Production of documentation, being done.
> >
> > I think all other issues that have been raised have been solved. Please
> > advise if this is not the case.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > /Dimitris
Received on Thursday, 9 August 2001 12:04:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:34:03 UTC