On 12/16/13 12:53 PM, ext James Graham wrote:
On 16/12/13 16:43, Arthur Barstow wrote:
On 12/16/13 11:20 AM, ext James Graham wrote:
On 12/12/13 16:20, James Graham wrote:
On 12/12/13 15:13, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 12/11/13 8:42 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
[IR] <http://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/Interop/WebWorkers>
Looking at this link, there are passes marked for obviously incorrect
tests (e.g. see https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24077
which says that
http://w3c-test.org/web-platform-tests/master/workers/interfaces/DedicatedWorkerGlobalScope/postMessage/second-argument-null.html
should fail in any conformant UA, but it's marked as passing in Opera
and Chrome.
So presumably we will need to rerun the tests in all UAs again
once all
the bugs have been fixed, yes?
Yes. I have found another couple of trivial bugs in the tests which I
will fix up. I will also have a got at fixing Ms2ger's test runner to
work in a better way, sort out some way to automate the visual output,
and hopefully we can generate a new implementation report with minimal
effort.
So, I made a sample implementation report [1] using an in-browser test
runner based on Ms2ger's earlier work (see public-test-infra for more
details). The browsers are those that happened to be on my computer. I
don't intend for anyone to take these results as authoritative, and
more work is needed, but it is much better than editing a wiki. And
has revealed yet more bugs in the tests.
In time we can use this approach in collaboration with vendors to
fully automate generating implementation reports.
[1] http://hoppipolla.co.uk/410/workers.html
James - this is excellent!
Did you run the tests via <http://www.w3c-test.org/testrunner/workers/>?
What would it take to include Travis's IE results?
No, this is based on a new-ish tool that itself depends on the
self-hosted-tests changes [1].
If Travis can make the results available in the same JSON format the
tool uses then we can incorporate them directly; having a common,
machine-writable format is the essential point of this work. However I
would suggest that he waits until we fix the broken tests and land the
self-hosted-tests changes and test runner / report generator. If
people are interesting in speeding this process up, the most valuable
thing they can do is help finish the review at [1].
[1] https://critic.hoppipolla.co.uk/r/368
OK, thanks for the clarification. I see r/368 is now 93% complete so
hopefully this will be completed RSN ;-).
-AB
