- From: Kostiainen, Anssi <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 11:53:03 +0000
- To: "Zhang, Zhiqiang" <zhiqiang.zhang@intel.com>, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- CC: James Graham <james@hoppipolla.co.uk>, W3C Device APIs WG <public-device-apis@w3.org>, "ms2ger@gmail.com" <ms2ger@gmail.com>
> On 13 Jan 2016, at 15:33, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org> wrote: > > On 12/01/2016 18:23, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote: >> With that patch (and the the promise-throw patch to ildharness), Firefox >> gets 100% on the idlharness test. Chrome has 4 failures: >> * one due to throwing instead of rejecting on promise returning methods >> (in this case, getBattery()) >> * one due to a bad class string for the prototype of BatteryManager (not >> sure where that comes from) >> * two due to not implementing addEventListener/removeEventListener as >> expected. >> >> I think the 1st and last 2 bugs can be argued as not specific to Battery >> API; the 2nd one probably deserves more investigation though. > > I've checked, and it seems that 2nd as well is a general bug of Chrome with WebIDL, not one specific to this API: > https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=239915 > > So again, doesn't seem like a blocker to me. Encouraging progress. Thanks guys! Zhiqiang - could you regenerate all.html [1] with the patches applied? I think you could also drop battery-interface.html assuming the battery-interface-idlharness.html gives us good coverage now. Thanks, -Anssi [1] https://w3c.github.io/test-results/battery-status/all.html
Received on Thursday, 14 January 2016 11:53:40 UTC