- From: Zhang, Zhiqiang <zhiqiang.zhang@intel.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 06:55:22 +0000
- To: "Kostiainen, Anssi" <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>, James Graham <james@hoppipolla.co.uk>
- CC: W3C Device APIs WG <public-device-apis@w3.org>
+ James in this thread. > From: Kostiainen, Anssi > Sent: Friday, August 28, 2015 2:32 PM > > > On 28 Aug 2015, at 09:17, Zhang, Zhiqiang <zhiqiang.zhang@intel.com> > > Thanks for the info. > > > >> From: Kostiainen, Anssi > >> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 9:33 PM > >> Mozilla is revising its Battery Status API implementation to match > >> the latest spec and provided some feedback re the test case for > >> getBattery() in Bugzilla [1]. > > > > I've caught an issue report at > > https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/issues/2104 > > Thanks for the point, I had missed this one. > > >> Do you have a suggestion how to improve that test case? > > > > But I have no idea at current being how to improve that test. > > I'm wondering whether the testharness.js built-in promise_*() are of any > help or whether we'd need to patch testharness.js to add support. I'd guess > testharness.js should be able to properly test functions that return promises. > jgraham who's the original author of testharness.js was on the Moz bug, > perhaps he knows. Hmm, seems this is a problem of idlharness.js rather than testharness.js, as the idlharness.js hasn't considered the Promise related tech. Thanks, Zhiqiang > >> [1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1050749#c37 > >> [2] http://w3c-test.org/battery-status/battery-interface.html
Received on Friday, 28 August 2015 06:56:19 UTC