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

Re: [Recap] Issues

From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris@ontologicon.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 14:57:42 +0100
Cc: "Curt Arnold" <carnold@houston.rr.com>, <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
To: "Mary Brady" <mbrady@nist.gov>
Message-Id: <9B97F0FA-418A-11D6-B8D4-000393556882@ontologicon.com>
I think the safest thing then is to make them available from the DOM TS 
page. I'll put a link to them from the main page and put them in the 
www.w3.org/DOM/Test area

/Dimitris

>>> Level 2/3
>>> 1. Following X-Hive's intent to write tests, we said we would generate
>>> the DOM TS ML for levels 2 & 3. This would greatly simplify for
>>> companies looking into writing tests for current implementations.
>>
>>
>> DOM L2 schemas have been available for quite some time.
>>
>
> [mb] And in fact, Rick has been using them quite successfully.  Maybe
> we should make it clear that they are available -- I'd hate to think
> that folks are willing to write tests for L2 and this is stopping them!
>
>> I've committed changes to build.xml, dom-to-xsd.xsl and corresponding
>> patches that allow building a DOM L3 schema.  There are still some 
>> rough
>> edges, I've posted a hand finished copy of a dom3.xsd and a modified
> version
>> of Jeroen's sample L/S test to 
>> http://home.houston.rr.com/curta/dom3.ZIP
>>
>> There are still a few issues, I haven't reworked the keys and keyrefs 
>> to
>> account for anonymous inner classes, so you will get spurious keyref
>> constraint validations when accessing variables defined in anonymous 
>> inner
>> classes.  There are several interfaces missing, CDATASection and 
>> Entity,
> for
>> example, not sure why they disappeared.  Text is still DOM L2 since the
> XML
>> sources omitted it and TextEvent.  Would be really nice if the next 
>> round
> of
>> DOM specs were validated.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 27 March 2002 08:57:49 GMT

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