Skip to content

Lack of normative testable steps #29

Description

@jan-ivar

For this spec to be web compatible, I think it will need normative teeth, as well as be explicit about when and where it applies. E.g. #28. In general, I think it needs to either:

  1. Require other specs to normatively reference contentHint in explicit algorithms, or
  2. Take it upon itself to own and specify the relevant normative language additions on behalf of the specs it wants to influence, as a form of extension spec.

Then add tests that prove functionality (beyond the current getter/setter tests).

Activity

  1. aboba commented on Aug 9, 2019

    @aboba
    Contributor

    The same criticism could be made of degradationPreference whose WPT tests only address getter/setter.

  2. alvestrand commented on Mar 12, 2020

    @alvestrand
    Contributor

    I think the spec language is OK now, without the implementation having followed suit yet.
    Test needed, I guess.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions