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

Status check

From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris@ontologicon.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 23:08:54 +0200
Cc: bclary@netscape.com, edward@jsunit.net
To: www-dom-ts@w3.org
Message-Id: <CAD0169E-6C35-11D6-836B-000393556882@ontologicon.com>
All,

Since there's not been that much activity around the DOM TS lately, I 
wanted to get a picture of what people are working on currently. Last 
time we did a roll call, activity was taking place in:

1. Framework issues (Bob requested some feedback on browser behaviour)
2. HTML test sanity check
3. Licensing issues (Philippe sent a draft for a new grant of license).

On 1, I think we need to speed up thing some more. Bob, Edward, please 
forward to the list any requests you have for specific issues. Also, in 
continuation to the emails I sent to this list and company 
representatives (Netscape and Microsoft) asking for help on the 
framework, I sent a similar request to the Microsoft DOM WG 
representative in order to ascertain IE functionality in connection with 
the DOM TS (in particular IE for Mac that doesn't work that well).

One reason we need to speed things up is that a series of DOM WG 
documents need to be advanced in the W3C document release pipeline. 
Also, for DOM Level 3 to become a recommendation, prior levels need to 
have been covered by a TS. This means that we need to release the full 
DOM Level 1 TS, with HTML tests and the new framework, as soon as 
possible.

Again, please advise on what you need help on.


On 2, I take it that we do not need that much longer to conclude the 
sanity checking on those level 2 HTML tests that are used as level 1 
HTML tests as well.

On 3, we do not need to have a more precise wording to release the 
second version of the DOM Level 1 TS, but getting the final wording is 
of course a good thing.

I'm thinking that we also need to indicate that the build process does 
not work with the release of Xalan; I myself only managed to buidl the 
DOM TS using the D1 version. Is this consistent with what other have 
experienced?

Any other issues?

/Dimitris
Received on Monday, 20 May 2002 17:09:07 GMT

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