- From: Mary Brady <mbrady@nist.gov>
- Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 12:02:28 -0400
- To: "Dimitris Dimitriadis" <dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se>, <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
Comments inlined. --Mary ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dimitris Dimitriadis" <dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se> To: "'Curt Arnold'" <carnold@houston.rr.com>; <www-dom-ts@w3.org> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 11:39 AM Subject: SV: [General] Status? > comments inlined > > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Från: Curt Arnold [mailto:carnold@houston.rr.com] > Skickat: den 9 augusti 2001 17:29 > Till: www-dom-ts@w3.org > Ämne: Re: [General] Status? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dimitris Dimitriadis" <dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se> > To: "Dimitris Dimitriadis" <dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se>; > <www-dom-ts@w3.org> > Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 7:07 AM > Subject: SV: [General] Status? > > > > I'm back from my vacation and would like to do a quick check on the items > > list posted earlier and listed below. > > > > I think we are ready to move quite fast toward publishing the DOM TS if we > > allow for the following: > > > > 1. Some period to sanity check and edit existing transforms and build > files. > > I don't expect the Java transform to be perfect, however I think that when > we start to walk through the NIST contributed tests, we will quickly > identify latent issues. > > I have worked a little on a ECMAScript transform but haven't written enough > supporting code to run the few tests that I have generated. > [mb] We have an ECMAScript transform from a derivative Schema -- some minor mod's that were made to one of Curt's earlier versions -- I don't think it will serve as the transform, but it may be useful to see the less than polished code that is generated -- the tests seem to run in both IE and Mozilla using this harness -- I'll have to look into making it available. It may provide some starting points. > Haven't done anything on Python. > > [dd] We'll definitely allow some time to tweak the transforms if needed once > we have the test files ready. > > > 2. A general discussion as to whether ANT will be used as the primary tool > > for builds. > > I thought it was the most appropriate tool. What alternatives would you > like to suggest? > > [dd] none, it was merely a comment aimed at raising a discussion if anyone > feels we should have another tool. ANT works fine for me, besides we can > really use any tool we like for building the TS before packaging it. > [mb] Ant works for me, but it is not trivial to get ant, cvs, the appropriate parsers, xslt processor, etc working together. Some documentation would sure help! > > 3. A general discussion as to whether people wanting to download the files > > themselves should be able to do this to both build the DOM TS as well as > > write their own harness around it. > > The W3C CVS has anonymous read-access so unless we intentionally want to > prevent people from accessing the source, they are technically capable of > doing it. Since the most significant audience for the test source and > harnesses are parser authors, I don't think that it is necessary to provide > an easier way to get at the source. > > [dd] The DOM WG expressed the wish to > 1. have a simple harness around the tests, for example for on-line checking > using ECMA script > 2. be able to write your own harness around the tests > > I believed this is allowed by the license as it was finalized, correct me if > I'm wrong. > > The standoff over using the W3C Software License was explicitly to allow > legitimate deriviative works. I only made my contributions after I thought > this issue was resolved. Reversing that decision and making the tests or > harness non-public would be detrimental to the effectiveness of the suite > and would do seriously bad things to my attitude. > > [dd] Nothing in the development of the DOM TS will be non-public, so I don't > see there is any reason to worry. Given that people will be able to download > the tests from the CVS, they may also want to write the harness around it. > One way of going about is to just inform on what files are definitely > needed, then let people do what they want. > > > 4. Release of NIST tests, sanity check, editing, being done. > > I understand NIST's desire not to publish anything that isn't almost > perfect. But it is impossible to determine any coverage issues and > discourages anyone else from trying to contribute tests until the NIST tests > are committed to the CVS (which will hopefully happen shortly). > > [dd] I agree, I believe we will be able to go into sanity checking phase > quite soon. > [mb] Not sure what you mean here -- our less than perfect tests are and have been available for some time. The tests have been modified, but have not all been translated and compiled. I would expect that any contribution would not be accepted until it met this minimum requirement. > > 5. Production of documentation, being done. > > > > I think all other issues that have been raised have been solved. Please > > advise if this is not the case. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > /Dimitris > >
Received on Thursday, 9 August 2001 12:04:01 UTC