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

Re: Clarification in index.html

From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris@ontologicon.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 21:51:00 +0100
Cc: "Curt Arnold" <carnold@houston.rr.com>, <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
To: "Jason Brittsan" <jasonbri@microsoft.com>
Message-Id: <8D314018-218C-11D6-9D3C-000393556882@ontologicon.com>
One way to solve this since we ship test files and not a framework to 
generate correct files is in the transform; we could consider writing 
one transform for each known implementation, or write a loding mechanism 
for each implementation which JsUnit uses to load the tests (which do 
not then need to be written for each known implementation).

If this is a good idea, proposals are more than welcome.

/Dimitris



On Thursday, February 14, 2002, at 07:37 , Jason Brittsan wrote:

> I'm sorry, I should have been more specific.  That was more of an
> implementation note.  It's something to consider for the test cases to
> insure an accurate test environment.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dimitris Dimitriadis [mailto:dimitris@ontologicon.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 1:23 AM
> To: Jason Brittsan
> Cc: Curt Arnold; www-dom-ts@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Clarification in index.html
>
> No reference to particular implementations in given, only that the TS
> tests XML and SVG implementations of DOM Leel 1.
>
> /Dimitris
>
> On Thursday, February 14, 2002, at 07:30 , Jason Brittsan wrote:
>
>> It should also be noted that MSXML 3.0 ships with IE 6.  Is this
>> scenario covered?
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, February 14, 2002, at 09:42 , Manos Batsis wrote:
>>
>>
>> Good point, but what really concerns me is MSXML 4.0; to use it's
>> features, one must use a version specific ProgId:
>>
>> var myDomObject = new ActiveXObject("Msxml2.DOMDocument.4.0");
>>
>>
>> The use of a version independent ProgId calls MSXML3.0 or lower
>> depending what's in the machine:
>>
>> var myDomObject = new ActiveXObject("Msxml2.DOMDocument");
>>
>> Does the TS handle this?
>
Received on Thursday, 14 February 2002 15:50:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:34:04 UTC