W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > May 2013

Re: Overview of testing in view of CR exit

From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 16:28:42 +0200
To: "HTML WG (public-html@w3.org)" <public-html@w3.org>, "Robin Berjon" <robin@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.ww8ft4qoidj3kv@simons-macbook-pro.local>
On Tue, 14 May 2013 16:38:54 +0200, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> based on the discussion we had at the face to face, I've made a pass  
> over the ToC to reflect the notions we had about what is considered  
> stable on its own (as per exit criteria), what requires testing, and in  
> the latter set what has implementations and/or tests (I took a  
> conservative approach to flagging that and will be refining it to add  
> more).
> This provides the basic information from which to start planning the CR  
> exit. All the parts that are flagged as needing testing but not having  
> tests will need to have tests written, and once we have tests for all of  
> them they will need to be run through two implementations to produce an  
> implementation report.
> See:
>      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tests-cr-exit.html
> Comments welcome,

It might be useful with a legend for "Section has no implementation  
requirements" so that it's easier to separate from "Considered  

I think it would be closer to the truth if the default is that any  
implementation requirement in the spec is *not* interoperable and needs  

For instance, section 2.5.6 Colors, I have an old test case:


This is probably not up-to-date with the current spec, but even so, I get  
different failures in Opera, Chrome and Firefox, showing it is not  

I could go on and demonstrate cases for sections marked "Considered  
interoperable" in fact aren't, but I don't think that's a good use of my  
time. Hopefully my point gets across anyway.

Simon Pieters
Opera Software
Received on Friday, 17 May 2013 14:29:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:46:02 UTC