W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom-ts@w3.org > April 2002

Re: Decision needed STRICT vs. TRANSITIONAL

From: Mary Brady <mbrady@nist.gov>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 18:23:57 -0400
Message-ID: <004601c1e0de$68771240$b000a8c0@scrappy>
To: "Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>, "'Rick Rivello'" <richard.rivello@nist.gov>
Cc: <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
We'll have to look at where this is occurring, and see if this is the only
reason the test input file is transitional.  I only see 8 tests that use
<name interface="HTMLFormElement" ...we'll take a look at them.

The bigger problem we are having at the moment is the number of
DOM constructs that refer to items that are deprecated in HTML 4.0.
Testing these forces the HTML documents to be transitional.  I would
think that since they are in the DOM spec, we would be interested in
having tests for them in the test suite.  If someone has an implemention
that doesn't support transitional HTML, these tests would be problematic
for them.  I'm not seeing anything in the spec that addresses what should
be done if a deprecated feature is not supported.

--Mary

----- Original Message -----
From: "Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>
To: "'Rick Rivello'" <richard.rivello@nist.gov>
Cc: <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 3:40 PM
Subject: RE: Decision needed STRICT vs. TRANSITIONAL


> My leaning would be that if it is possible to test the feature using a
> STRICT document, then use a strict document.  Since there should come a
day
> when the transition is past, using strict should produce the most widely
> applicable tests.
>
> The tests that use HTMLFormElement.name to check that the appropriate form
> was returned should be changed to use HTMLElement.id and/or assertSame()
> instead of forcing the test document to be transitional just to put a name
> attribute in.
>
> I'm not sure if the spec provides any guidance to whether a strict (only)
> implementation could throw an exception or map an deprecated attribute to
> another attribute.
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 10 April 2002 18:18:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 6 April 2009 12:58:46 GMT