http://flickr.com/photos/hendry/2824592876/ - Chrome seems to fail the cookie test amongst others. Haven't had time to look into this. http://flickr.com/photos/hendry/2840053692/ - ie8beta2 is also misbehaving On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 4:03 PM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org> wrote: > * Testing Widgets? > ACTION: Kai to contact editor of Widgets packaging spec to see if testing is appropriate [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-mwts-minutes.html#action03] I'm in good contact with Marcos (the widget spec editor) and according to him there are some parts of the specification that are stable and testable. Though a more realistic date of November to begin a suite was suggested. I'm also in touch with Andrei Popescu (Geolocation spec editor). He also suggested to wait a little before undertaking any testing work. I'm hoping to meet with him and we should have a better idea next week. > * Testing plugin support? > ACTION: Kai to look into testing for plugin support [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-mwts-minutes.html#action05] I fear external mimetypes http://static.webvm.net/supportedMimeTypes.html and (NPAPI) plugins has been ignored by the W3C. I can understand why, but at the same time I recognise the importance of being able to extend the capabilities of a Web browser in order to innovate (e.g. Gears, Flash video). Disclosure: I work at the Aplix Corporation which does just that with WebVM http://wiki.webvm.net/ The grounds for innovation are less fertile on mobile devices, which are generally locked down from extension. So aiming a plugin test at help could prevent stagnation of the Web like we've seen in the past on Desktops. At work, we have developed a (freely licensed) minimal NPAPI plugin http://git.webvm.net/?p=npsimple NPAPI is as close as we have to a plugin standard. It is supported by Opera, Webkit & Gecko. IE/Trident uses ActiveX and at Aplix we are putting together a minimalistic test for that too. The NPAPI standard is worked upon on a private mailing list: https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/plugin-futures So the "plugin support test" could be just something like http://foo.webvm.net/simple.html However how does the platform know where to find and install the plugin? A plugin finder service has been employed by Mozilla in the past, but the service seems to be poorly maintained: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=453632 So besides actual plugin support, the packaging of plugins needs some attention. So to conclude I propose using 'npsimple' for testing basic plugin support in browsers. Kind regards,Received on Tuesday, 9 September 2008 10:53:29 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:34:12 UTC