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

Re: dom1.dtd not in CVS

From: Curt Arnold <carnold@houston.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 08:43:48 -0500
Message-ID: <000701c23961$76f58cd0$a800a8c0@CurtMicron>
To: <www-dom-ts@w3.org>

Comments inlined:

>   So I am far more concerned with changes to the DTD's used to validate
> the test definitions than I am with changes or additions to tests in the
> In fact I have a task on my plate to programmatically generate tests to
> though this framework.  So DTD stability is doubly important to me.
>   Since the DTD's are generated, I guess the real question is how stable
> the inputs and scripts used to generate the DTD's ????

The most significant factor is the stability of the DOM level that is being
addressed.  The DTD's and Schemas for DOM Level 1 and DOM Level 2 are very
stable.  The schema for DOM Level 3 will change with new working drafts of
the L3 modules.  There are some constructs that are needed in L3 tests that
can't effectively be validated using DTD's, so we don't anticipate producing
an L3 DTD.

The other source for changes in the introduction of new utility constructs.
For example, writing events tests was made substantially easier by adding a
EventMonitor type and associated methods.  These additions are fairly rare
and changes to existing constructs are unlikely.  You could review the
revision history of transforms/dom-to-schema.xsl if you want some metric of
how frequently that occurs.

Your COM runner would also want to use the domX-interfaces.xml file produced
from the build process.  This basically provides the expected "type library"
for the DOM implementation.  It is used by the current code generation to
determine when cast operators are needed.

>   Or maybe as a longer term solution, Is there any place I can get
> generated copies of the test suite so I can avoid going though the whole
> process just to get a few files ????  It might not be a bad idea to
include even
> the generated components in CVS !!!!!


The DOM3 schemas I assume are out of date.
Received on Thursday, 1 August 2002 09:43:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:34:05 UTC