W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-test-infra@w3.org > October to December 2014

Re: [IndexedDB] Seeking status and plans

From: Odin Hørthe Omdal <odinho@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:12:40 +0200
Message-Id: <1413882760.268550.181440777.77452921@webmail.messagingengine.com>
To: Joshua Bell <jsbell@google.com>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
Cc: "Xiaoqian(Cindy) Wu" <xiaoqian@w3.org>, "Zhang, Zhiqiang" <zhiqiang.zhang@intel.com>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, "public-test-infra" <public-test-infra@w3.org>, Jonas Sicking <sicking@mozilla.com>
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014, at 19:15, Joshua Bell wrote:
>    - key_invalid.html - this assumes a particular prioritization of
>    invalid
>    input checks, and relates to
>    https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26492
> Accounting for those, the "less-than-2" tests show us to be in pretty
> good shape across implementations.

And on an even higher level, we could get several more test bugs like
that because many exceptions are not ordered:


That's a problem we see less with the more procedural style e.g. Fetch
is written in.  When we did IDB for Presto we were stuck several times
on bugs about the exception order.

>From the bug you mentioned however, there seems to be some agreement
about how to fix this. Since Mozilla is willing to change, and is the
only one actually passing those tests right now, it shouldn't be a big
problem just changing the tests to what we want to write into the spec
(doing the clone first).  Trident and Webkit has not responded yet, but
they might already do it that way as well.  Hence we'll might get three
passing and one failure (Gecko) if we're lucky when we change those

  Odin Hørthe Omdal
Received on Tuesday, 21 October 2014 09:13:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:34:11 UTC