MobileOK review

Hi everybody,

A few comments more on mOK LCWD (25 May 2007)


2.3.10 White Space

"Several tests refer to white space. White space has the same definition in this document as in XML. For XML 1.0 [XML10] it is defined in http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-common-syn  as being:

S ::= (#x20 | #x9 | #xD | #xA)+ i.e. the characters SP, TAB, CR and LF"

- Should   entities be considered? Having a look at the related test (3.12, 3.15, 3.17) it makes sense.


3.11 MEASURES

"For each property in the CSS Style whose value is a numeric measure of length stated together with a unit
   If the value is non-zero and the unit is not "em" or "ex"..."

- Why has been % left out? it's not considered an unit?
- The current wording could give the impression that numeric measures without units are allowed, which in general is not a good idea with some exceptions. Although this issue could be already covered by CSS validation, redundancy could be helpfull for the shake of completeness in this test as "mobileOK tests are intentionally expressed in an independent way..." (see comment #16 at [1])

Extract from comment #11 at [1]
> There are other CSS properties where px values may be allowed as the 
> background-position or the outline-width.
Working Group Resolution:
We agree with the basic point but we will address it in the next phase of the Best Practices document instead.

- There is at least a property (background-position), but may be more depending on how they manage CSS2 properties (see next point), that should be allowed (admitted by the group) and is currently been left out. I don't see any reason to leave it out as the changes required are minimal, and more important, because as currently defined this test could produce a fail outcome when it should be a pass.

- What happen with CSS2? It's implicitly allowed as there is no test that fail when using CSS2 properties, even referenced at 3.20. Should these properties also be checked? If so, other test may also be reviewed as they are affected (e.g. see comment #6 at [2])


3.18 POP_UPS

- What about JS popups? (window.open)


Typos / Editing

3.6 - Why is the first condition, "Note that if an HTTP request is unsuccessful while conducting this test, the result is FAIL", out of the general algorithm? This way could be easily leave out.
3.13 - Apparently there is a missing "an": "...or _an_ object..."
3.19 - "some value" is still there in one place instead of the previously suggested selected
3.21 - Shouldn't be the PASS rule ("If there is no CSS Style, PASS") the first of the algorithm in the shake of simplicity?


[1] - [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Jun/0021.html]
[2] - [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Jun/0001.html]


Regards,
 CI.


--------------------------------------

Carlos Iglesias

CTIC Foundation
Science and Technology Park of Gijón
33203 - Gijón, Asturias, Spain 

phone: +34 984291212
fax: +34 984390612
email: carlos.iglesias@fundacionctic.org
URL: http://www.fundacionctic.org

Received on Monday, 11 June 2007 11:23:25 UTC