- From: Arnold, Curt <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 13:08:40 -0600
- To: "'www-dom-ts@w3.org'" <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
Wasn't intended to be off-list. Sorry. > -----Original Message----- > From: Dimitris Dimitriadis [mailto:dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se] > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 1:53 PM > To: 'www-dom-ts@w3.org' > Cc: xmlconf-developer@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: [General] domconftest now a project at SourceForge - Members > > > Btw, forgot to ask: > > Curt Arnold, David Brownell, Richard Tobin, Edwin Goei, Fred > L. Drake, Jr., > Joe Polastre, James Strachan. Mary Brady > > are listed as users of the xmlconf project. Is it safe to > assume that all > want to be in the domconftest as well? (so far, there's Curt, > David, Fred, > myself and Mary). The current set should be fine. I think most of the others were more involved in XML conformance testing and it would not be difficult to add them if they express an interest. > > /Dimitris > > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Från: Dimitris Dimitriadis > Skickat: den 28 juni 2001 20:42 > Till: 'Arnold, Curt' > Ämne: SV: [General] domconftest now a project at SourceForge > > > Is this an offline posting? > > In any case, I have no personal preference really. However, > I'm not a W3C > employee, so I'm not at liberty to take decisions on how and > where we'll > collaborate wrt. W3C machinery and policies, I'm just happy if we do. > > What about letting the W3C submission list be the point of > entry of tests, > then put everything on the SF and develop there, then put > everything on W3C > machines once finalised? I think that is probably the best approach. > > As far as the W3C CVS being undesirable; I think the > conlusion was (I just > scanned through the archives) that using a W3C bug-tracker > was undesirable, > therefore we looked at SF. I don't think anyone's ever said > that using the > W3C CVS as such is undesirable. I thought it was since it might be difficult to add non-W3C members as committers since it might open up the entire W3C CVS system. I has assumed the primary reason HTML Tidy moved to SourceForge was to allow non-W3C members to participate without compromising the W3C CVS. > > In any case, I'm happy either way. > > /Dimitris > > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Från: Arnold, Curt [mailto:Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com] > Skickat: den 28 juni 2001 20:27 > Till: 'Dimitris Dimitriadis' > Ämne: RE: [General] domconftest now a project at SourceForge > > > > I definitely agree. However, we've known for some time that > > the primary > > place for browsing and downloading tests, transforms and > > schems would be the > > W3C site. SF came into the question as an alternative to > W3C as far as > > bug/issue tracking was concerned. > > > > I realise that keeping tests and other resources on two > > different locations > > can be tedious, but it may be a price that we have to pay > (especially > > myself, since I'm going to manually check in tests to SF if > > there are issues > > about them). > > > > /Dimitris > > We could use the SourceForge CVS as our collaborative > workspace and publish > to the W3C site as appropriate. > > Since most tests will need some sort of modification between > submission and > final approval, they need to go into a CVS somewhere during > this process. > > I had inferred that using the W3C CVS was undesirable, > thinking it was the > primary reason HTML Tidy moved to SourceForge. >
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2001 15:12:52 UTC