Re: About comment #2

On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 12:52:46AM +0200, Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote:
> Thanks for this clarification. So in this case I agree with the 
> rationale of BPWG (but note the typo as raised by CarlosI earlier in the 
> thread).

Indeed, I pointed that out on June 13th (to this list and the
public-bpwg-comments address).

> Still, one of the questions by Johannes was whether POST-based 
> applications can be tested for mobileOK. Unless there are objections we 
> should send this as a comment (in addition to the typo).

I get the impression that MobileOK is supposed to be able to be run
against a site without site-specific configuration or user
interaction. That negates the possibility of doing anything useful
with POST forms. I suspect that that sort of thing is what the
"mobileOK Pro" tests are about (among other things).

Received on Friday, 22 June 2007 11:59:08 UTC