- From: Tobie Langel <tobie@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 14:38:16 +0200
- To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Cc: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, public-test-infra@w3.org
On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 at 2:09 PM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote: > Le mercredi 23 octobre 2013 à 14:04 +0200, Robin Berjon a écrit : > > I would be interested, but depending on where/when it is I might not be > > able to make it. > > Noted; I guess the where and when will be determined once we know the > who :) At this time, the limited number of people that have shown > interest are all Europe based FWIW. > > That said, to what degree do you actually *need* this to run with > > multiple browsers? Would it not be better to run with a browser on one > > side and something else pretending to be a browser that's actually testing? > > While this might be practical for some of the testing contexts (e.g > continuous integration), I think the WebRTC Working Group should include > in its CR exit criteria actual interop across actual browsers, which we > should prove with testing across different browsers. My understanding of what Robin describes is a partial, instrumented implementation that could be used for testing. If so, it could qualify as an interoperable implementation, no? --tobie
Received on Wednesday, 23 October 2013 12:36:57 UTC