- From: Karen Anderson (IE) <Karen.Anderson@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 22:53:01 +0000
- To: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>, "public-web-perf@w3.org" <public-web-perf@w3.org>
We started down this path with Navigation Timing with checkin #170. At the time we wanted to avoid scripting errors when a UA had not fully implemented part of a spec while running the tests and made it such that you didn't have to put every call within an individual try/catch block. What did you have in mind? -Karen -----Original Message----- From: James Graham [mailto:jgraham@opera.com] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 1:31 AM To: public-web-perf@w3.org Subject: Tests returning an inconsistent number of results Several test submissions here use a design where if the feature is not available they fail to run the rest of the testsuite (e.g. [1]). This is an antipattern because it makes it unnecessarily difficult to compare the results between builds; ideal tests should always return the same number of results. Will anyone object if I patch the problematic tests and commit the fixes? [1] http://w3c-test.org/webperf/tests/submission/Google/HighResolutionTime/test_cross_frame_start.html
Received on Tuesday, 18 September 2012 22:54:13 UTC