- From: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 17:24:14 +0200
- To: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
- CC: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@gmail.com>, Hari Kumar G <harig@opera.com>
On 6/2/11 5:13 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote: > On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 9:26 AM, Marcos Caceres<marcosscaceres@gmail.com> wrote: >> Quote from WARP: >> >> """ >> Let sub domains be the result of applying the rule for getting a >> single attribute value to the value of the subdomains attribute. If >> the value of sub domains is not a valid boolean value, then this >> element is in error and the user agent MUST ignore this element. >> """ >> >> subdomains has a default value of false so why is ignoring the >> complete<access> element needed? If only the subdomains is to be >> ignored, then the steps for processing the config.xml need to be >> changed to include the default value. >> > > I've removed the following two tests from the test suite until we get > this resolved: > > # ic (download, files) > Tests that the UA ignores an access element with an invalid subdomains > value. To pass, the remote script must NOT load and PASS must remain > displayed. > > # id (download, files) > Tests that the UA ignores an access element with an invalid subdomains > value. To pass, the remote script must NOT load and PASS must remain > displayed. Proposed fix: [[ 5. If the subdomins attribute is absent, then let sub domains be the value false. Otherwise, or let sub domains be the result of applying the rule for getting a single attribute value to the value of the subdomains attribute. 6. If the value of sub domains is not a valid boolean value, then let sub domains be the value false. ]] I've put that into the editor's draft. I call to republish the spec with the correction ASAP. Kind regards, Marcos
Received on Thursday, 2 June 2011 15:24:45 UTC