- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 14:26:32 +0100
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: Jonathan Griffin <jgriffin@mozilla.com>, Alexander Mertens <alexander.mertens@stud.fh-dortmund.de>, miss.verstaendnis@nurfuerspam.de, Mikkel Toudal Kristiansen <mikkel.kristiansen@gmail.com>, Kris Krueger <krisk@microsoft.com>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, "'public-html-testsuite@w3.org'" <public-html-testsuite@w3.org>
On Nov 2, 2010, at 2:14 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 11:28:09 +0100, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org> wrote: >> Thank you all for sending test results. I updated the table: >> http://test.w3.org/html/tests/reporting/report.htm >> >> We will need to improve the report table on our side however because >> sometimes "0% means no results", or 100% means "one pass, two no >> results"... If anyone has time to take a stab at it, don't hesitate! >> >> So, the table at it stands is misleading currently. > > Reportedly the results for Opera are at least partly bogus. > > This test suite is vastly incomplete. Publishing unverified results of a vastly incomplete test suite without a big fat warning is extremely silly. Why was this done? It's also strange that the results include alpha/beta/preview versions of most browsers, but the stable version of Safari. Wouldn't be a big deal other than the fact that this rather buggy test results page was labeled as "Official" and then picked up in the press as authoritative: http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/ie9_outperforms_other_browsers_for_html5_complianc.php We should probably be cautious about the chance of creating PR events based on incorrect information. Regards, Maciej
Received on Tuesday, 2 November 2010 13:27:09 UTC