IRC log of htmlt on 2011-09-20

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:04:23 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #htmlt
15:04:23 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-htmlt-irc
15:05:34 [krisk]
Agenda -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-testsuite/2011Sep/0007.html
15:05:57 [krisk]
If anyone wants to dial into conf call speak up...
15:06:09 [krisk]
I suspect we'll just be on IRC like normal...
15:07:31 [krisk]
Agenda Item #1 Check for bugs on Approved Tests
15:07:58 [krisk]
bug 14191?
15:08:13 [krisk]
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14191
15:08:37 [krisk]
This was opened by ms2ger...
15:08:44 [Ms2ger]
Philip is finishing his PhD, and won't have time to look at it in the next few weeks
15:08:46 [jgraham]
Philip is finishing his PhD so he is busy for a few weeks
15:08:51 [jgraham]
Dammit
15:09:05 [jgraham]
At least we have a consistent story
15:09:38 [krisk]
I'm open to having someone convert the tests
15:09:54 [Ms2ger]
I can do that, but I don't want to do it without Philip's okay
15:10:37 [jgraham]
There isn't any problem with waiting a bit
15:10:38 [krisk]
I don't think it makes sense to remove them from the approved folder
15:11:01 [krisk]
Though we should set a date when we think it's reasonable to convert the tests
15:11:22 [jgraham]
If Philip's PhD funding is the way I expect, he probably has to finish very soon, so I don't think this will drap on
15:11:25 [jgraham]
*drag
15:11:36 [jgraham]
Or at least he will need a different excuse for being busy
15:12:03 [krisk]
Ok then lets plan on having these get converted at some point
15:12:56 [krisk]
We also need to move the getElementsByClassname tests to the Dom core WebApps suite
15:13:18 [krisk]
I see that jgraham is OK with this looking at the list
15:13:53 [krisk]
http://w3c-test.org/webapps/DOMCore/tests/submissions would be the location
15:14:57 [krisk]
Did you still want to do this ms2ger?
15:15:08 [Ms2ger]
Doing that right now, actually
15:15:24 [krisk]
You should create an Opera folder since they created the tests
15:16:58 [krisk]
Let move on to agenda item #2
15:17:00 [krisk]
"Appcache test format - testing without a network"
15:18:17 [krisk]
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#offline
15:18:46 [krisk]
Some testing of the feature is going to need a different approach than just using testharness.js
15:19:44 [krisk]
The api and events should be fine - but actually checking if the files come from the server vs the 'cache' is a bit more complex
15:20:31 [krisk]
It's possible to create a self-describing test...
15:21:14 [krisk]
Though I wanted to see if you were intrested in these tests and/or had another option
15:22:01 [krisk]
Does anyone have any objections or suggestions?
15:22:11 [Ms2ger]
Don't know anything about it myself
15:24:32 [krisk]
Microsoft submitted one test for this feature http://w3c-test.org/html/tests/submission/Microsoft/appcache/appcache_000.htm
15:24:59 [krisk]
Though it's very simple...but it's a start
15:25:25 [krisk]
Firefox seems to support window.applicationCache FWIW
15:26:31 [Ms2ger]
I assume we have tests
15:26:37 [krisk]
Moving on to Agenda item #3 New Test Submissions
15:27:33 [krisk]
Microsoft submitted some history api tests
15:27:43 [krisk]
http://w3c-test.org/html/tests/submission/Microsoft/history/history_000.htm
15:28:33 [krisk]
Though we don't pass them all we believe some of the tests we fail are correct per the spec and want to fix them in Internet Explorer 10
15:29:34 [krisk]
If you think the tests are wrong feel free to make a comment on the list
15:30:10 [krisk]
Seems like we can get this feature to be pretty interoperable given it's support in various browsers at this point
15:30:13 [jgraham]
They look plausible in that Opera passes them all apart from two fails unrelated to the history API ;)
15:30:48 [jgraham]
I am still looking for review of the Opera-submitted history API tests
15:31:44 [jgraham]
They also reveal a problem with some changes Aryeh made to testharness.js
15:31:44 [Ms2ger]
jgraham, so if you review Microsoft's, maybe krisk can get someone to review yours? :)
15:32:03 [jgraham]
Ms2ger: Indeed, that could work :)
15:32:12 [krisk]
I'll take a peek
15:32:27 [jgraham]
(they are not mine personally, I hasten to add)
15:33:46 [krisk]
Microsoft also submitted a 'dat' file for the parser
15:34:02 [jgraham]
I would like to take this oppertunity to whine at the continued non-existence of a review tool for hg
15:34:09 [jgraham]
krisk: Pointer?
15:34:29 [jgraham]
krisk: That should really be added to the html5lib repository under the MIT license
15:35:04 [jgraham]
krisk: If that works for you, I can help you get write access to that repo
15:35:57 [Ms2ger]
Peter Linss' tool is in production, I believe
15:36:19 [Ms2ger]
We should get it set up for HTML
15:37:00 [krisk]
Do you have a pointer to the tool?
15:37:38 [jgraham]
Is his tool at all sutiable for HTML?
15:37:38 [Ms2ger]
http://test.csswg.org/shepherd/
15:37:46 [Ms2ger]
No idea
15:37:58 [jgraham]
I got the impression it was designed with an entirely differnet set of use cases in mind
15:38:32 [jgraham]
Principally allowing third parties to collect test results to produce implementation reports
15:38:55 [jgraham]
With a bunch of extra test metadata stuff
15:39:09 [jgraham]
I didn't get the impression it was going to be a kickass code-review tool
15:39:18 [jgraham]
Which is what I really want
15:39:24 [jgraham]
Or at least a mediocre one
15:41:09 [jgraham]
So it falls below the level of useful so far
15:41:17 [jgraham]
For code review at least
15:41:20 [krisk]
If someone moves this to the w3c I can take a peek
15:42:19 [krisk]
...seems like a good question for plh
15:43:36 [krisk]
<@jgraham> krisk: If that works for you, I can help you get write access to that repo
15:44:20 [krisk]
I don't think anyone from Microsoft will be submitting stuff to a non w3c Hg server
15:45:55 [jgraham]
Are you prepared to submit it under the MIT license so that other people can copy it across to the other server?
15:46:22 [jgraham]
It would be a great pity if there was fragmentation in the parser testsuite
15:46:23 [krisk]
I believe the w3c test suite license allows for that (it's the MIT/BSD license)
15:46:41 [krisk]
It's part of the royalty free part of the w3c
15:46:42 [jgraham]
I thought it was BSD/W3C license
15:48:17 [krisk]
I'm not a lawyer but happy to ask the w3c for clarity
15:48:51 [jgraham]
The wiki says "The test suite is licensed under both the W3C Test Suite License and the 3-clause BSD License."
15:49:01 [jgraham]
That might be wrong ofc
15:49:23 [jgraham]
Anyway, please ask w3c staff
15:50:20 [krisk]
sounds good
15:51:19 [krisk]
Also if you follow the webapps WG Microsoft also submitted some tests for workers, indexed db and web sockets
15:51:34 [jgraham]
Yes, I saw that. Thanks!
15:51:50 [krisk]
If you have feedback on the tests being correct feel free to send it to the web-apps list
15:52:24 [krisk]
Also Microsoft would like to facilitate getting a backend setup on the w3c for testing websockets
15:53:08 [krisk]
I plan on attending TPAC so this might be a good agenda items for the webapps WG
15:53:58 [krisk]
Anne (from opera) was also asking for XHR2 tests since it looks like he is the only one submitting tests
15:54:08 [jgraham]
I should be at TPAC too; I can organise to be in the WebApps meeting
15:54:56 [krisk]
Shall we adjourn?
15:54:59 [Ms2ger]
Sure
15:56:03 [krisk]
RRSAgent, make logs public
15:56:13 [krisk]
rrsagent, generate minutes
15:56:13 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/20-htmlt-minutes.html krisk
17:20:51 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #htmlt
17:25:33 [Ms2ger]
RRSAgent, bye
17:25:33 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items