Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
Actually, based on feedback on the list (thanks Maciej and Robin), and
talking to Lachy, we are thinking that we should seperate out the tests
that *require* CSS 3 selectors, to make the test suite check
implementation of the API, and then require at least two 100% complete
and completely interoperable implementations.
I believe Lachy will be following up on this about now - both for the
list and the test suite.
Here is the revised proposal for the exit criteria.
* Tested implementations are required to have support for:
- Selectors API
- Selectors defined in CSS 2.1.
- HTML
* Tested implementaions may optionally support:
- Selectors introduced in Selectors Level 3
- XHTML
- SVG
At least two implementations must pass 100% of the baseline testsuite
and should pass additional tests, dependent on the following conditions:
* The baseline testsuite comprises tests that check for conformance to
all requirements in the API using only HTML and Selectors defined in
CSS 2.1.
* Tests using Selectors introduced in Selectors Level 3, or XHTML+SVG,
are considered to be additional tests.
* An additional test may be marked as N/A for an implementation if:
- The test uses a selector that the implementation does not support
- The test uses XHTML+SVG that the implementation does not support
* Implementations are not required to pass all additional tests,
however no failures must be caused by an incorrect implementation of
the API itself. Failures of additional tests caused only by an
incorrect implementation of Selectors do not count.
This implies that the testsuite should be split into several files:
1. Baseline containing tests using only HTML and CSS 2.1
2. Additional tests using XHTML+SVG and CSS2.1 (equivalent to the
previous test, but with the addition of SVG-related tests)
3. Additional tests using HTML and Selectors 3
4. Additional tests using XHTML and Selectors 3
--
Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
http://lachy.id.au/
http://www.opera.com/
