Fwd: Test Status Matrix updates

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

Forrest --

Rob's research has uncovered review comments that send these 5 tests back 
to "reworking" state.

They should be very easy to fix, and fortunately they don't invalidate the 
tests so much as require that some documentation problems be fixed.  (And 
HTML validity.)

Per the TC telecon (and follow-up about the F2F go/nogo), please take care 
of these asap.  We will then list the tests for potential WG "accepted" 
endorsement, unless we get other comments.  These could be the first tests 
in the test suite to be "Accepted"!

All --

while we're at it, did anyone else have any issues with any of these 5?

(I recall some unspecific comments about problems in the interior-style or 
fill styles or some such tests.)

-Lofton.

>From: Robert Orosz <roboro@auto-trol.com>
>To: "Lofton Henderson (E-mail)" <lofton@rockynet.com>
>Subject: Test Status Matrix updates
>Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 14:26:58 -0700
>
>Lofton,
>
>[...]
>The status of the following tests should be changed to reworking.
>
>setGetIntensity
>setGetLineStyles2.0
>setGetFillStyles2.0
>setGetStrokeType
>setGetStrokeOffset
>
>The review URL is the same for all of the above tests.
>
>http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/cgmo-webcgm/200811/msg00002.html
>
>The reason for the status change back to reworking is also the same for all
>of the tests; namely, the test author has not implemented the changes
>mentioned by the reviewer.
>
>Associate Editor's (that's me ;-)) note:
>
>The HTML markup for all of the tests is invalid. Implementing the changes
>mentioned by the reviewer will improve, but not entirely fix, the problem.
>The test author should use the W3C's Markup Validation Service to ensure
>valid markup.
>
>That's all for now, my head is spinning ...
>
>Rob