- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 18:12:32 +0200
- To: "Simon Pieters" <zcorpan@gmail.com>, "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: public-bpwg-comments@w3.org, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 07:35:36 +0200, Simon Pieters <zcorpan@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 00:21:16 +0200, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote: > >> I think that's an interesting point, but the way it's phrased >> doesn't help me track the status of it as well as I'd like. >> >> In stead of "The tests warn for things..." could you pick one >> or two specific bits of text from the mobileOK tests document >> that you disagree with? > > Ok. > > 3.15 OBJECTS_OR_SCRIPT (partial) > If a script element is present, warn ... > For authors who want to comply with mobileOK (i.e., make the mobileOK > validator not emit any warnings or errors) Warn is not a fail. If what you do results in a warn, you may or may not be mobileOK. If you want to have an automatic checker not warn about anything, that's about your own priorities, not about mobileOK (likewise if you accept any kind of warning, that's not very clever either). > 3.18 POP_UPS ... > AIUI, mobiles don't support popups at all. This is untrue. Some do. Cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group hablo español - je parle français - jeg lærer norsk chaals@opera.com Catch up: Speed Dial http://opera.com
Received on Thursday, 14 June 2007 16:12:58 UTC