- From: 蜡己苛 <sungok.you@infraware.co.kr>
- Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 10:16:32 +0900
- To: "Kris Krueger" <krisk@microsoft.com>, "Robin Berjon" <robin@berjon.com>, "James Graham" <jgraham@opera.com>
- Cc: "Arthur Barstow" <art.barstow@nokia.com>, <public-webapps-testsuite@w3.org>, 辫己琶 <stkim@infraware.co.kr>, 捞辆如 <jhlee@infraware.co.kr>
Re-sending for archival purposes... -----Original Message----- From: 蜡己苛 Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 2:09 PM To: 'Kris Krueger'; Robin Berjon; James Graham Cc: Arthur Barstow; public-webapps-testsuite@w3.org; 辫己琶; 捞辆如 Subject: RE: Path for testharness resources [Was: Re: Seeking status of Infraware's Web Storage test submission] Hi, All We have changed the path to the testharness. Please check it. :) <script src="/resources/testharness.js"></script> <script src="/resources/testharnessreport.js"></script> If you have any comment for the test cases, please let me know. :) BR Sung-Ok, You. -----Original Message----- From: Kris Krueger [mailto:krisk@microsoft.com] Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 4:14 AM To: Robin Berjon; James Graham Cc: Arthur Barstow; public-webapps-testsuite@w3.org; 辫己琶; 蜡己苛; 捞辆如 Subject: RE: Path for testharness resources [Was: Re: Seeking status of Infraware's Web Storage test submission] #1 is the best method (<script src="/resources/testharness.js) -Kris -----Original Message----- From: Robin Berjon [mailto:robin@berjon.com] Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 6:57 AM To: James Graham Cc: Arthur Barstow; public-webapps-testsuite@w3.org; 辫己琶; ext 蜡己苛; 捞辆如 Subject: Re: Path for testharness resources [Was: Re: Seeking status of Infraware's Web Storage test submission] On Feb 16, 2012, at 15:51 , James Graham wrote: > On Thu 16 Feb 2012 03:46:12 PM CET, Arthur Barstow wrote: >> As such, I think a consequence of this requirement is that reference to the testharness resources must use an absolute path and that means using one of: >> >> 1. <script src="/resources/testharness.js"> 2. <script >> src="http://w3c-test.org/resources/testharness.js "> >> >> Would our active testing folks - e.g. Kris, James, Ms2ger, Aryeh, PLH - please confirm this requirement and the path that should be used? > > I think 1) is preferred style here. There isn't really a style that never causes problems but 2) is particularly problematic because it means everyone needs to edit the files to reuse them outside the W3C infrastructure (a strong requirement for us). Relative paths can also be problematic because it encourages copying testharness.js around rather than having a single maintained copy. Agreed. An additional issue with relative paths is that you have to change them when you move tests from /spec/submitted/someone to /spec/approved. Not a huge change but exactly the type that will waste one's time. (1) isn't perfect in that you need to run a local server to run tests locally, but I think that's pretty much a requirement if you want to be realistic anyway. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon Coming up soon: I'm teaching a W3C online course on Mobile Web Apps http://www.w3devcampus.com/writing-great-web-applications-for-mobile/
Received on Friday, 9 March 2012 01:16:34 UTC