- From: Christian Grün <christian.gruen@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 18:08:20 +0200
- To: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-expath@w3.org
> I just updated again the same matrix that is now giving a lot of useful data > [1] Thanks. > * 6 implementations that claims support for the latest edition of the EXPath > HTTPClient specification (20100109) > * 4 implementations that claims support for the latest edition of the EXPath > Zip Specification (20101012) > [...] Just a minor note: it may be more helpful here to count the number of different code bases. If I got it right, Saxon and Calabash (and Servlex?) are based on the very same implementation. -- What do others think? > 1) Do we need to have a more stable specification system (ŕ la W3C > Recommendation) or do we want to have a leaving specification (ŕ la WhatWG) > ? To speed up the process, I would opt for a more liberal system. > 4) Do we have some test suite already available ? At least is someone > already able to provide some tests ? We have written several JUnit tests for most of the implemented specifications.. https://github.com/BaseXdb/basex/tree/master/src/test/java/org/basex/test/query/func ..some of which could probably be adapted for general use. Looking forward to everyone's opinions, Christian
Received on Thursday, 10 May 2012 16:09:23 UTC