Dear i18n WG,
During the call to transition the Widgets Packaging and Configuration
specification (PC) [1] to CR, the Director requested that aside from
the MUST assertions the Web Apps WG test the optional aspects of the
specification in our test-suite [2].
As you are aware, to facilitate
Cyril Concolato a écrit :
Hi all,
I'm trying to understand the difference between two tests:
[1]
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/test-suite/test-cases/ta-UEMbyHERkI/000/config.xml
[2]
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/test-suite/test-cases/ta-UEMbyHERkI/003/config.xml
In [1], the
Sean Hogan wrote:
What is the reason for the native implementation requirement?
Is it W3C policy?
There's a couple of reasons for this. The main reason being that
JavaScript libraries are not limited by the same compatibility
constraints as a browser, and so something that could be
Hello Marcos,
in case you are also aiming at support for other ITS elements and
attributes: you could adapt the following tests from the ITS test suite
http://www.w3.org/International/its/tests/
which the ITS Working Group used for attributes at the its:span element.
TRANSLALTE
Local - In
Hi Cyril,
Cyril Concolato wrote:
Hi Marcos,
Marcos Caceres a écrit :
Hi Cyril,
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Cyril Concolato
cyril.concol...@enst.fr wrote:
Hi,
The test d1.wgt is about the src attribute of the icon element. It
says that
it tests the following assertion:
If the src
On Nov 27, 2009, at 5:14 AM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
to test ITS support, the WebApps WG would appreciate some
guidance with designing a handful of test cases that the i18n WG would
consider suitable to provide interoperability across implementations.
Please make sure the PC test suite does
This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish Last Call Working Draft
#2 of:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-access/
This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to record the group's
decision to request advancement for this LCWD. Note that as
specified in the Process Document [PD], a
Hi Marcos,
Reading the rule for identifying the media type of a file in the editor's draft [1], I think there is an editing problem. The first 4 bullets are numbered (1,2,3,4) and rest of the bullets are not which makes the algorithm refer to step 10 and 11 that don't exist.
Regards,
Cyril
Hi,
I assumed it was corrected with this email:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009OctDec/0828.html
Thanks,
Marcin
Marcin Hanclik
ACCESS Systems Germany GmbH
Tel: +49-208-8290-6452 | Fax: +49-208-8290-6465
Mobile: +49-163-8290-646
E-Mail: marcin.hanc...@access-company.com
Arthur Barstow wrote:
On Nov 27, 2009, at 5:14 AM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
to test ITS support, the WebApps WG would appreciate some
guidance with designing a handful of test cases that the i18n WG would
consider suitable to provide interoperability across implementations.
Please make
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Marcin Hanclik
marcin.hanc...@access-company.com wrote:
Hi,
I assumed it was corrected with this email:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009OctDec/0828.html
Thanks,
Marcin
Marcin Hanclik
ACCESS Systems Germany GmbH
Tel:
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Cyril Concolato
cyril.concol...@enst.fr wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to implement the element-based localization and I found the spec
unclear with regards to the inheritance of th xml:lang attribute and I would
like to propose some improved text.
First, this
Hi Cyril,
I think we also need to clarify what happens when xml:lang=, in that
it must be treated as unlocalized content e.g.
widget xmlns=http://www.w3.org/ns/widgets;
xml:lang=en
name short=I'm in english, though not explicitly marked as such!
Behaves as if xml:lang=en
/name
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Cyril Concolato
cyril.concol...@enst.fr wrote:
Hi all,
I noticed that the following two tests are the same (minimal config.xml).
Maybe one of them should be removed or modified.
Yes, the content of both test's XML files is the same, but they are
testing
14 matches
Mail list logo
