Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Develop #243

Merged
merged 7 commits into from Jul 15, 2013
Merged

Develop #243

merged 7 commits into from Jul 15, 2013

Conversation

halindrome
Copy link
Contributor

This pull rolls up all the necessary changes to support RDFa 1.1 by default for document generation.
Tests have been introduced and pass. They are (somewhat) comprehensive.
This is my first pull - please be gentle.

by default.    Ensured that the output is consistent
with microformats too.  Incorporated the w3p vocabulary
for w3c process stages.  Added tests about what is
generated and what is not depending on doRDFa settings.
Updated documentation.  Expanded generation of output
documents to include XHTML1 and XHTML5.  XHTML1 generation
remains valid by removing aria stuff as well as HTML5 stuff.
Now supports RDFa as a default.

Can be disabled with doRDFa = false.

Documentation updated.
@darobin
Copy link
Member

darobin commented Jul 8, 2013

At a quick look this looks good, thanks, but it doesn't apply cleanly. Can you update your fork, fix the conflicts, and repush please? (It should automatically add to this PR if you push to the same origin branch.) Thanks!

@halindrome
Copy link
Contributor Author

Well rats. Sure - might take me a little while.

@darobin
Copy link
Member

darobin commented Jul 11, 2013

Thanks, this now applies cleanly, but unfortunately it breaks the build :(

See https://travis-ci.org/darobin/respec/builds/8888865 for details.

It seems that your test for the new ISODate is making assumptions about the default behaviour of Date objects in browsers that may differ depending on the environment. The other tests I can't really tell why they're failing just by scanning them, but I note that you explicitly disabled RDFa in some of the other tests. I'm guessing that's to make them pass because they were checking things that were interfering?

@halindrome
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks I will look at that right now. Rats.

@halindrome
Copy link
Contributor Author

Okay I made some changes... unfortunately I can't get the command line tests to actually run so I can't test the way you did.

@tobie
Copy link
Member

tobie commented Jul 12, 2013

@halindrome provided you have phantomjs installed, running the tests should be as simple as running npm test from the command line.

@darobin
Copy link
Member

darobin commented Jul 12, 2013

Also, the tests should run the same way as they do in the browser (more specifically, in WebKit).

Thanks, I'll check later.

, isoDate: function (date) {
if (!(date instanceof Date)) date = this.parseSimpleDate(date);
// return "" + date.getUTCFullYear() +'-'+ this.lead0(date.getUTCMonth() + 1)+'-' + this.lead0(date.getUTCDate()) +'T'+this.lead0(date.getUTCHours())+':'+this.lead0(date.getUTCMinutes()) +":"+this.lead0(date.getUTCSeconds())+'+0000';
return date.toISOString ;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks like you're returning the function rather than the result of applying the function here.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You are right - weird that the test passed. Fixed.

@halindrome
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for all the comments. I will effect repairs.

@tobie
Copy link
Member

tobie commented Jul 12, 2013

Sounds like you're now passing the test suite. :)

LGTM.

@halindrome
Copy link
Contributor Author

Actually I had forgotten to integrate the rdfa tests into the phantom
runner. Done now.

On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Tobie Langel notifications@github.comwrote:

Sounds like you're now passing the test suite. :)

LGTM.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/darobin/respec/pull/243#issuecomment-20892962
.

Shane McCarron
halindrome@gmail.com

darobin added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 15, 2013
@darobin darobin merged commit a9a61a2 into w3c:develop Jul 15, 2013
@darobin
Copy link
Member

darobin commented Jul 15, 2013

Thanks a lot! I'll issue a build later today, tomorrow at the latest. (After that I'm on vacation so don't expect other builds until August, unless @tobie or @dontcallmedom remember how to do them :).

@tobie
Copy link
Member

tobie commented Jul 15, 2013

After that I'm on vacation so don't expect other builds until August, unless @tobie or @dontcallmedom remember how to do them :).

I don't.

@darobin
Copy link
Member

darobin commented Jul 15, 2013

The build has shipped; I've added instructions in the readme should you need them while I'm away.

I believe there's a remanent failure in the code that tests the ISO date thing. It can run afoul of local to UTC conversions, so that the test may return a different day than that which it expects :)

shikhar-scs pushed a commit to shikhar-scs/respec that referenced this pull request Feb 19, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants