-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.1k
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
Test <link>.workerType reflection #6164
Conversation
*This report has been truncated because the total content is 982542 characters in length, which is in excess of github.com's limit for comments (65536 characters). Firefox (nightly)Testing web-platform-tests at revision bfa5c39 All results1 test ran/html/dom/reflection-metadata.html
|
*This report has been truncated because the total content is 982475 characters in length, which is in excess of github.com's limit for comments (65536 characters). Sauce (safari)Testing web-platform-tests at revision bfa5c39 All results1 test ran/html/dom/reflection-metadata.html
|
*This report has been truncated because the total content is 982490 characters in length, which is in excess of github.com's limit for comments (65536 characters). Chrome (unstable)Testing web-platform-tests at revision bfa5c39 All results1 test ran/html/dom/reflection-metadata.html
|
*This report has been truncated because the total content is 982454 characters in length, which is in excess of github.com's limit for comments (65536 characters). Sauce (MicrosoftEdge)Testing web-platform-tests at revision bfa5c39 All results1 test ran/html/dom/reflection-metadata.html
|
@domenic This appears to be correct, but I'm wondering about one detail in
https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/semantics.html#attr-link-workertype I'm just now learning how |
That's an authoring requirement; the browser doesn't implement it, but conformance checkers do. |
Understood. Do you have any suggestions for how to distinguish authoring requirements? (If only so I don't give more bad advice in the future) |
It's a common topic of discussion to mark them up better in the HTML spec, as it does cause confusion. But in general anything that is not phrased as algorithm steps (or links to concepts defined as such) is probably an authoring requirement. I.e., anything where we say you must not do something, without saying what happens if that requirement is contradicted. |
Got it. Thanks! |
Anything that specifies requirements for the page (what it must or must not contain) is an authoring requirement. Anything that specifies requirements for the processing is an implementation requirement. The requirement you quoted says that the attribute must not be specified, but we still need to specify and test what the browser does if the author does specify it. |
No description provided.