- From: Laura Holmes <holmes@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 13:31:06 -0400
- To: "Roland Gülle" <roland@7val.com>
- Cc: public-mobileok-checker <public-mobileok-checker@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <135a9f560706271031geba8e6nbd357dd1e7846acd@mail.gmail.com>
> > Should we also return the position elements in the template? As things are right now, the lack of position element is not causing the program to crash, but it was named in the specs you guys drew up. I'm still figuring out how to acquire the information requested (document tidiness, URL, and mokiID). They're on my ToDo list. If anyone has any quick suggestions regarding these, let me know, otherwise I'll keep forging ahead. For me right now, if you could update CVS with the best possible position implementation you can, I can go ahead and work on inputting the values once I figure things out. The position information is going to have to be there eventually. I might as well know what format I'm working with. Let me know if you have any questions. In other xsl news, I'm also trying to figure out how to have the test outcome displayed at the top of the result document. Is there some way to overwrite that value after the tests have been performed, or some kind of template call? As things stand right now, we just put in a dummy value into the test outcome declaration, and then we leave it up to the individual results to determine the real outcomes. However, after the test is performed, if we have a test that we originally claimed passed, and then failed on sub-tests, we still get a result document that says test outcome pass but sub-results state failure. One other possibility is striking the overall test "outcome" value from the top of the result and just letting the rest of the test garner a pass or fail outcome from the sub-results. Thoughts? Cheers, Laura
Received on Wednesday, 27 June 2007 17:31:29 UTC