- From: Gavin Kistner <phrogz@me.com>
- Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 18:19:44 -0600
- To: Jim Barnett <1jhbarnett@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-voice@w3.org
I locally modified my TXML to use the same strategy as 179 (use unquoted 123 in both locations) and it works well enough for me. Is that a change you’d feel OK with making, so that I can remove my local override? On Jun 20, 2014, at 8:34 AM, Jim Barnett <1jhbarnett@gmail.com> wrote: > We have had more problems with quotes than anything else in the tests - putting them in, taking them out, doubling them, undoubling them. Does anyone else have an opinion on what to do with these tests? > > On 6/19/2014 9:27 AM, Gavin Kistner wrote: >> test179.txml has: >> <send event="event1"><content>123</content></send> >> <transition … conf:eventdataVal="123” … /> >> >> My data model evaluates the text content of <content> as code, so that <content expr=“123”/> is the same as <content>123</content>, and my transformation of the tests converts the condition above to <transition cond=“_event.data.val==123” … />. >> >> However, test354.txml has this: >> <send event="event2"><content>foo</content></send> >> <transition … conf:eventdataVal="'foo'” … /> >> (notice the single quotes around the ‘foo’ inside the double-quotes). >> >> This breaks my data model, since evaluating foo as a Lua expression results in nil, not the string ‘foo’. If I switch my data model to interpret the text child of <content> as a string instead, then test 179 would fail. >> >> >> I can modify this test to change to <content>’foo’</content>, but I think this is too specific to ECMAScript and Lua data models. I would suggest that at a minimum this test should match the pattern from test179. However, ideally, I am afraid that more conf: is really needed here, to be properly generic for data models. >> >> > > -- > Jim Barnett > Genesys >
Received on Monday, 30 June 2014 00:20:16 UTC