Re: [whatwg] URL interop status and reference implementation demos

2014-11-22 Thread Sam Ruby
On 11/21/2014 05:32 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote: From: Sam Ruby [mailto:ru...@intertwingly.net] I guess I didn't make the point clearly before. This is not a waterfall process where somebody writes down a spec and expects implementations to eventually catch up. That line of thinking sometime

Re: [whatwg] URL interop status and reference implementation demos

2014-11-21 Thread Domenic Denicola
From: Sam Ruby [mailto:ru...@intertwingly.net] > I guess I didn't make the point clearly before. This is not a waterfall > process where somebody writes down a spec and expects implementations to > eventually catch up. That line of thinking sometimes leads to browsers > closing issues as WON

Re: [whatwg] URL interop status and reference implementation demos

2014-11-19 Thread James Graham
On 19/11/14 16:02, Domenic Denicola wrote: > From: whatwg [mailto:whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of > James Graham > >> That sounds like unnecessary complexity to me. It means that random >> third party contributers need to know which repository to submit >> changes to if they edit the

Re: [whatwg] URL interop status and reference implementation demos

2014-11-19 Thread Sam Ruby
On 11/19/2014 09:55 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote: From: Sam Ruby [mailto:ru...@intertwingly.net] These results compare user agents against each other. The testdata is provided for reference. Then why is testdata listed as a user agent? It clearly is mislabled. Pull requests welcome. :-)

Re: [whatwg] URL interop status and reference implementation demos

2014-11-19 Thread Domenic Denicola
From: whatwg [mailto:whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of James Graham > That sounds like unnecessary complexity to me. It means that random third > party contributers need to know which repository to submit changes to if they > edit the urld testata file. It also means that we have to

Re: [whatwg] URL interop status and reference implementation demos

2014-11-19 Thread James Graham
On 19/11/14 14:55, Domenic Denicola wrote: >> web-platform-tests is huge. I only need a small piece. So for >> now, I'm making do with a "wget" in my Makefile, and two patch >> files which cover material that hasn't yet made it upstream. > > Right, I was suggesting the other way around: hosting

Re: [whatwg] URL interop status and reference implementation demos

2014-11-19 Thread Domenic Denicola
From: Sam Ruby [mailto:ru...@intertwingly.net] > These results compare user agents against each other. The testdata is > provided for reference. Then why is testdata listed as a user agent? > I am not of the opinion that the testdata should be treated as anything other > than as a proposal a

Re: [whatwg] URL interop status and reference implementation demos

2014-11-19 Thread Sam Ruby
On 11/19/2014 09:32 AM, Domenic Denicola wrote: From: Sam Ruby [mailto:ru...@intertwingly.net] Done, sort-of: https://url.spec.whatwg.org/interop/browser-results/ Excellent, this is a great subset to have. I am curious what it means when "testdata" is in the "user agents with differences" c

Re: [whatwg] URL interop status and reference implementation demos

2014-11-19 Thread Domenic Denicola
From: Sam Ruby [mailto:ru...@intertwingly.net] > Done, sort-of: https://url.spec.whatwg.org/interop/browser-results/ Excellent, this is a great subset to have. I am curious what it means when "testdata" is in the "user agents with differences" column. Isn't testdata the base against which the

Re: [whatwg] URL interop status and reference implementation demos

2014-11-19 Thread Sam Ruby
On 11/18/2014 06:37 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote: Really exciting stuff :D. I love specs that have reference implementations and strong test suites and am hopeful that as URL gets fixes and updates that these stay in sync. E.g. normal software development practices of not changing anything witho

Re: [whatwg] URL interop status and reference implementation demos

2014-11-19 Thread James Graham
On 18/11/14 23:14, Sam Ruby wrote: > Note: I appear to have direct update access to urltestdata.txt, but I > would appreciate a review before I make any updates. FYI all changes to web-platform-tests* are expected to be via GH pull request with an associated code review, conducted by someone other

Re: [whatwg] URL interop status and reference implementation demos

2014-11-18 Thread Ian Hickson
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014, Sam Ruby wrote: > > Anne has kindly given me access to the directory on the server where the > url.spec lives. I've started to move some of my work there. > > https://url.spec.whatwg.org/interop/urltest-results/ IMHO it's probably best to keep data like that on personal sit

Re: [whatwg] URL interop status and reference implementation demos

2014-11-18 Thread Sam Ruby
On 11/18/2014 06:37 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote: As a final note, the reference implementation has a list of known differences from the published standard: intertwingly.net/projects/pegurl/url.html Hmm, so this isn't really a reference implementation of the published standard then? Indeed loo

Re: [whatwg] URL interop status and reference implementation demos

2014-11-18 Thread Domenic Denicola
Really exciting stuff :D. I love specs that have reference implementations and strong test suites and am hopeful that as URL gets fixes and updates that these stay in sync. E.g. normal software development practices of not changing anything without a test, and so on. From: whatwg [mailto:whatwg