W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > June 2016

RE: [battery] Spec update tests ready for review

From: Zhang, Zhiqiang <zhiqiang.zhang@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2016 06:19:58 +0000
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, "Kostiainen, Anssi" <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>
CC: "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <0EA8FB2070816C499E0A50AC1B0B5C163ADA6A44@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>

Many thanks for this good catch and discussion.

> From: Boris Zbarsky [mailto:bzbarsky@mit.edu]
> Sent: Friday, June 3, 2016 9:24 PM
> On 6/3/16 3:32 AM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote:
> > Right; based on Boris' analysis of that failure, I think we can make
> > the case to the Director that it is not directly linked to this
> > particular spec or the particular change we're bringing to it.
> While true, what you should do is have a test that actually tests what this test
> was trying to test.  That is, load a page that is NOT about:blank, then navigate
> and check that the battery promise changed.

Seems we get the same situation by loading a page that is in the same origin of the page to be set. See


> I expect all implementations will pass that, but it really should be checked in
> the test suite.

Both Chrome 51 and Firefox Nightly get failed for this test case. What's wrong here?

Received on Monday, 6 June 2016 06:20:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:33:32 UTC