Re: Getting help on DOM Test Suite?

On Mar 7, 2007, at 2:51 AM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote:

>
>> The self-hosted productions were never endorsed
>> by the DOM WG and the results were never fully compared to those run
>> using JSUnit.
>
> Could you comment a bit more on this? Is there any reason to think the
> self-hosted version may be less reliable than the JSUnit-based one, or
> is it simply that nobody had the time to make a proper comparison
> between these two test harness?
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Dom

The self-hosted production was done late in the lifetime on the DOM  
Test Suite effort to try to address running the test on resource  
limited browsers, but it was more of a experiment than a WG product  
and did not have the same level of review.

The test documents (hc_staff.html and the like) are renamed and a few  
elements added to produce the self-hosted file.  Most tests are not  
sensitive to those modifications, but a few may be.  I think it is  
likely that the the DOM L1 Core, L2 Core and L2 HTML have had all  
those issues addressed for HTML (and maybe XHTML) in the CVS, but  
other modules may not have been reviewed.

It might be interesting to compare the currently generated self- 
hosted tests with the snapshot in the Webkit SVN.  I helped the  
project incorporate the self-hosted tests into their build system  
about 2 years ago, but have not followed any subsequent  
modifications.  The WebKit variant of the self-hosted tests is  
located in the LayoutTests/dom directory of their source tree and can  
be checked out using:

svn checkout svn://anonsvn.opensource.apple.com/svn/webkit/trunk/ 
LayoutTests/dom WebKitTS

There are several places where the WebKit developers (appropriately)  
chose compatibility with IE and Mozilla over compliance with the  
recommendation (or at least the test suite interpretation of the  
recommendation) and those decisions may be reflected in either the  
expected results for the tests (the corresponding .txt file) or the  
tests may have been modified.

There have been a few issues raised on the www-dom-ts@w3.org or www- 
dom@w3.org mailing list over the last many months that appear worthy  
of at least discussion.  I have had good intentions to address those,  
but the combination of little free time and no clear process since  
the DOM WG expired has resulted in it never getting to the top of my  
list.

p.s. I have subscribed to this list and no longer need to be cc'd.

Received on Wednesday, 7 March 2007 18:47:09 UTC