Boris, David, Le 20 sept. 2014 à 11:46, Boris Zbarsky <bzbar...@mit.edu> a écrit : > The biggest issue I have with this is exiting CR without anything resembling > a comprehensive enough test suite
* What is a comprehensive enough test suite? * How far the current test suite is from the comprehensive test suite you would have wished. * Does Mozilla has a comprehensive test suite on the same set of features? > to ensure anything like interop on some of the core hard pieces (they left > out the navigation algorithm, smart, but still have the bogus WindowProxy > spec in this supposed PR, for example). s/they/we/ The first rule of a group in which we (Mozilla) participate is to include yourself in the discussion. It helps a lot to change the attitude with regards to the issues. > My second biggest issue is that I don't have a concrete proposal for > addressing this the first issue. The test suite? My biggest issue with HTML5 spec is that it is too big to be meaningfully implementable and/or testable. Having a comprehensive test suite on something that big is close to insane. It is not necessary solvable for this round, but that could teach us on how to improve how to develop the future of features for the Web with more testing upfront and more modular approach. Basically we can learn from our mistakes. Not everything is lost ^_^ > Maybe it all doesn't matter too much as long as implementors keep reading the > whatwg spec instead. It's here where I have a disconnect with the first comment. Be whatwg spec or w3c spec if we dim that a comprehensive test suite is important then there should be one whatever the stamp on the text. If we think it's not that important, it doesn't matter if it's w3c or not. -- Karl Dubost, Mozilla http://www.la-grange.net/karl/moz _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
