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

Re: Release preparations (was Re: createEntityReference issues)

From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris@ontologicon.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:16:39 +0100
Cc: "'www-dom-ts@w3.org'" <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
To: "Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>
Message-Id: <0C4DEA50-14B2-11D6-B535-000393556882@ontologicon.com>
comments inlined
On Monday, January 28, 2002, at 10:09 , Arnold, Curt wrote:

>>> 1. Do we provide separate distributables for Java and ECMAScript
>>> bindings?
>>>
>> [dd] Open issue, no personal preference. I'd think it's
>> simpler to have
>> one distributable, but as I said, I have no personal preference.
>
> Let's go for one distributable for both standard bindings.  Do we want a
> .zip, .tar.gz or both?
>
[dd] I think we go for both, .tar.gz will certainly be smaller.

>>> 2. Do we include:
>>>
>>> A) DOMTSML test source
>>>
>> [dd] I think we should.
>
> Not hurtful and shouldn't bloat the archive much.  If provided, should 
> also
> have dom1.dtd and dom1.xsd provided.
>
[dd] OK, another issue with this is that we should post the two schema 
files in the CVS repository to avoid confusion (people have tried to 
validate the tests against the existing dom1.dtd) after build and 
release.

>>
>>> B) Doxygen generated documentation for Java tests
>>>
>> [dd] Open issue, people's views?
>
> The Doxygen generated output is both very useful in understanding the 
> tests
> and awkward for a casual user to generate on their own.  I'd recommend 
> at
> least having it as an optional download if not in the distribution 
> archive.
>
[dd] OK, we can do that, ie, have an optional download that includes 
doxygen documentation.

>
>>> C) Test matrix.  If so, would somebody like to pretty up the test
>>> matrix XSLT
>>>
>> [dd] I think we should, to give people an entry point to the DOM TS.
>> What is the XSLT in need of?
>
> Style.  I believe the contents are technically accurate (other than the 
> test
> URL's being bogus) but everything is straight black-on-white HTML with 
> no
> copyright notices, introductory text, etc.  If the tests are going to 
> be in
> the distribution, then the test matrix links should refer to the local 
> copy.
> If doxygen output is in the distribution, then a link to the Doxygen 
> page
> for that test would also be nice.

[dd] I'll look at this.

>
>>> 3. How do we handle the dependency of the JSUnit tests on
>> the relative
>>> location of JSUnit?  I've thought it might be technically
>> possible to
>>> eliminate that dependency, but I haven't spent serious time on it.
>>>
>>
>> [dd] I haven't been able to look into this either.
>
> I'm going to post something on the JSUnit mailing list shortly and will
> investigate tonight.
>
[dd] OK, please report as soon as you get news.

> It would also be nice to be able to run the Java tests from the JUnit 
> GUI
> runner.  I'll take a look at adding classes that correspond to running 
> the
> Level 1 Core tests for specific processors and configurations.  So you 
> could
> start the Junit GUI runner, browse junit-run.jar and then select
> TestDOM1CoreJAXPDefaultConfig1, TestDOM1CoreXercesConfig1,
> TestDOM1CoreCrimsonConfig2, etc.
>
[dd] This would indeed be very good, I've encountered the same problems 
you have with the GUI runner.

> Also, it would be appropriate to add GNUJAXP to the .jar class paths.
>
Received on Tuesday, 29 January 2002 07:16:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 6 April 2009 12:58:45 GMT