Re: [Selectors API] Call for Consensus - approve John Resig's tests

Ian Hickson wrote:
> However, I don't think the things tested in 002 are controversal. In 
> particular, all the UAs have converged on the behaviour tested by 002-001 
> for other objects

Ah, that wasn't the case last I checked.  And again, there's no 
specification I can find that requires it.

> 002-002 is explicitly required by the IDL block in Selectors API

This is the dependency on WebIDL I was talking about.

 > and I think there's no controversy over that particular requirement

Probably not, though I suspect that Gecko won't implement this any time 
soon; certainly not until WebIDL stabilizes more.  It requires some 
pretty nontrivial changes.

 > and 002-003 is a bog-standard DOM test of one of the
> requirements in the Selectors API that doesn't really depend on WebIDL at 
> all.

Sure; I didn't have any issues with that one.

> So since everyone is converging on the behaviour tested here, it 
> should be pretty safe.

It depends on whether you want tests for behavior that UAs are 
converging on or for behavior that the relevant specs actually require.

>> For that matter, it's not clear to me that test 001 is.
> Why not? I think everything in 001 is non-controversal and tests only 
> things that are required by Selectors API, no?

I was talking about 002-001.


Received on Thursday, 5 March 2009 14:25:45 UTC