Lachlan Hunt wrote:
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
The proposed exit criteria are in a separate thread, but essentially
are:
For a set of tests based on HTML, CSS 2.1 selectors and this spec,
there are two implementations that pass every test interoperably, and
do not fail any "additional" tests based on misimplementing this
specification (i.e. failures based on not supporting a technology used
only in the additional tests, such as MathML, will not be taken into
account).
Request for clarification. Does this require:
A) There must be two implementations, each of which passes every test
(i.e. the same two implementations pass all the tests); or
B) For each test, there are two implementations that pass it (but not
necessarily the same two for every test).
It reads like (A), but I have seen similar wording interpreted as (B) in
the context of other specs...
The intention in the original exit criteria proposal [1] was for there
to be at least two complete implementations, each passing 100% of the
baseline tests. I can make this clearer in the exit criteria as follows:
---
There must be at least two complete, independent implementations, each
of which must pass 100% of the baseline testsuite and should pass
additional tests, dependent on the following conditions:
* The implementations must be native implementations in shipping
products. (JavaScript library implementations don't count).
What is the reason for the native implementation requirement?
Is it W3C policy?
Sean
