- From: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 09:27:11 -0800
- To: Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>
- CC: public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Philip, Thanks so much for taking the time to look at the tests. I've passed on your feedback to our test team who authored the test cases for their review. I will let you know their response and we will update the tests accordingly. Cheers, Adrian. On January 26, 2009 3:29 PM, Philip Taylor [pjt47@cam.ac.uk] wrote: > Adrian Bateman wrote: > > [...] > > We'd welcome any other feedback you have about the tests. > > A couple of minor issues I noticed in the localStorage tests: > > http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/IETestCenter/HTML5/DOMStorage/localSt > orage_key.htm > is too strict - it requires '("foo" == storage.key(0) && "wow" == > storage.key(1) && "dom" == storage.key(2))', whereas the spec only > requires: > > "The key(n) method must return the name of the nth key in the > list. > The order of keys is user-agent defined, but must be consistent within > an object between changes to the number of keys. (Thus, adding or > removing a key may change the order of the keys, but merely changing > the > value of an existing key must not.)" > > so any permutation of the keys should be considered acceptable in this > case. > > http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/IETestCenter/HTML5/DOMStorage/localSt > orage_getItem_null.htm > is insufficiently strict - it requires '(null == szGetValue)', but that > will be true if the value is 'undefined' instead of 'null'. The test > should use '===' instead of '==', to ensure the type is correct. (I > think IE8 did actually return 'undefined' when I last looked, which is > a > bug that this test misses.) > > -- > Philip Taylor > pjt47@cam.ac.uk
Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2009 17:31:17 UTC