RE: [Various implementers] implementation effort for defaults (action-486 and action-489)

Hi Felix,

I would like to clarify: does this mean that we will have to perform additional TestSuite tests?

Also ... I did not understand from your e-mail what you meant with: "whether you will have the resources needed for testing the defaults" ? What did you mean by resources. We currently do not have test cases - will these be created by someone? Also ... I assume that parsing HTML5 without defaults and with defaults will have two different TestSuite outputs (must have). This may require some additional development in order to get the outputs out from the parser.

In our use-case we currently have a default list integrated, but at this point it probably differs from the list on the Wiki page. Therefore, it is important that the Default list on the Wiki gets stabilised as soon as possible. I would also like to remind that we have a schedule for our development efforts and that will be exceeded somewhere around the middle of May (after that we will wrap-up the deliverables from our side). So ... not to push anyone, but if the discussions get carried away we may not be able to implement all the changes that will appear after our development efforts will be finalised.

Best regards,
Mārcis ;o)

-----Original Message-----
From: Felix Sasaki [] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 10:48 AM
To: Ankit Srivastava; Dominic Jones; Leroy Finn; Clemens Weins; Karl Fritsche; Mārcis Pinnis; 'Thomas Ruedesheim'
Subject: [Various implementers] implementation effort for defaults (action-486 and action-489)

Dear Ankit, Dom / Leroy, Clemens / Karl, Marcis, Thomas,

we are currently discussing defaults for HTML5 processing. See the current thinking at

With this mail I want to check whether you will have the resources needed for testing the defaults. This seems to be critical for "Translate" and "Elements Within Text", since most of the tests here have already been done. So re-doing the tests with defaults would mean:
1) not providing new input files, no need to change these
2) provide reference output files
3) provide "your" output files

I am putting Dom / Leroy into the loop as well, for the reference output files.

The proposed time line would be:

- Decide on defaults within the next week, that is by 24 April
- Start testing with defaults before the Bled f2f. Discuss testing issues in Bled
- Finalize the testing within May.

Would that work for you timewise? If I don't hear back from you I'd assume that this is OK.

Note that this topic is important for other implementers as well (e.g. 
Linguaserve), but we had discussed that already during last week's call and I think we have the commitment already - let me know otherwise.

Thanks a lot for you help in advance,


Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2013 08:14:12 UTC