- From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 15:23:01 +0200
- To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Cc: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>, Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, Tobie Langel <tobie@w3.org>, Travis Leithead <Travis.Leithead@microsoft.com>, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>
Le lundi 13 mai 2013 à 09:16 -0400, Arthur Barstow a écrit : > I'm trying to understand the overall testing plan for Web IDL, > especially what specifically must be done to get the Web IDL v1 [CR] to > pass its CR exit criteria [Exit]. By plan here, I'd like to understand > who is doing what, (the `why` part presumably is obvious) and by when. > > We have at least the following resources and activities but I don't > quite understand how they fit together re moving the spec to PR. For > example, which efforts are required to move WebIDL to PR, is there a > commitment to complete the required pieces, which efforts are obsolete, etc. > > * Web IDL parser: there are at least two [idlharness.js] and > [webidl2.js]. Which one should be used for CR testing; has anyone > committed to maintaining and completing the parser; how is it used > vis-a-vis the CR exit criteria? widlproc is another WebIDL parser. https://github.com/dontcallmedom/widlproc Both Webidl2.js and widlproc passes widlproc parsing test suite, as well as randomly generated test cases from the WebIDL grammar. > * Online WebIDL checker [Online]. Is this current with the Web IDL [CR]; > do we recommend it be used; is anyone maintaining this or do we consider > it obsolete? It is up to date for the parsing part, and should be accurate (if not exhaustive) for the more semantic aspects. I am maintaining it (although I'm not putting a lot of resources into it) Dom > [Online] <http://www.w3.org/2009/07/webidl-check>
Received on Monday, 13 May 2013 13:23:27 UTC