Re: Vote recap

I think my preference is to go with Fred,
with a /files subdirectory.  I don't have a
strong preference  -- I just prefer leaving
the file extensions as they are -- I just don't
like a .domtest extension if it really is .xml
inside.

We need to resolve the metadata issue.  There has
been some discussion, but I don't recall resolution.
Basic changes have been made to all the files to
accomodate namespace, etc -- the files have not
been compiled (Curt, your directions don't work
on my win 2000 system, and I haven't figured out
what's wrong yet), so I am sure that there are some
problems with strings not quoted, or possibly a
variable not declared, etc.  We just need to slap
the metadata info around the code and I'll be happy
to put them into CVS.

I wouldn't pull from the test matrix, as the files are
out of date.  If someone could just propose the
metadata file, I can tweak a previous transformation,
and put the appropriate info in the test files -- my CVS
public key doesn't seem to allow access to the repository
yet, but I'd be happy enough to make a distribution available
and have someone else put them in.

--Mary

----- Original Message -----
From: "Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>
To: <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 11:04 AM
Subject: Vote recap


> Dimitris and I would prefer using *.domtest, Fred would prefer a /files
subdirectory and neither group would veto the other.  At this point, it is
basically Mary's call.
>
> I think that we are all anxious to have at least some tests in the CVS so
we can move forward.
>
> If there is some technical problem, like you can't access the CVS, then if
you could provide the tests to one of us and we can put it in the CVS on
your behalf.  If the current files are in the test
> matrix or otherwise accessible on the NIST site, then I'd be willing to do
something like my previous scraping to get the files into the CVS.
>
> Mary, are there any other issues that need to be resolved before we are
able to add the tests to the CVS and is there anything we can do to speed
the process?
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 14 August 2001 12:35:28 UTC