contentformat... etc. test

Hi all,
I have a question regarding the spirit of some of the wording of the
ContentFormatSupportAndValidMarkupTest. As it currently sits, the last item
in the test states:

For each included resource (see *2.3.6 Included
Resources*<http://www.w3.org/TR/mobileOK-basic10-tests/#included_resources>
):

If the response specifies an Internet media type that is not "text/css",
"image/jpeg" or "image/gif", *FAIL*

If the Internet media type is "image/gif" or "image/jpeg", and the resource
is not valid (see *2.3.9
Validity*<http://www.w3.org/TR/mobileOK-basic10-tests/#validity>),
*FAIL*

If the Internet media type is "text/css" and the content is not valid CSS
(see *2.3.9 Validity*<http://www.w3.org/TR/mobileOK-basic10-tests/#validity>),
*FAIL*


However, i've found that I can actually embed some css text into an object
tag within the markup of the primary document. Obviously, this is a fringe
case, but I'm guessing we are testing for values of "text/css" in the
context of it actually being provided as a stylesheet, in which case the
external resource would be included in the <?xml-stylesheet.... tag or a
link tag. Am I correct in assuming that we would want to put a FAIL on an
externally referenced resource that is "text/css" when it isn't actually
being used for style? In the case of embedding the text into the page with
an object tag, it shows up just like a "text/html" object would - which
according to the above test would result in a fail. The cases are so
similar, I would imagine they would be treated the same.

Unless I hear otherwise, I'm going to assume that if an included resource is
of type "text/css" and referenced from within the primary document, and is
not referenced within the <?xml-stylesheet.... tag or link tag, it will
produce a fail.

Let me know your thoughts,
Laura