-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.6k
Map HTTP-related tests to web-features #56953
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Map HTTP-related tests to web-features #56953
Conversation
|
@jugglinmike can you resolve conflicts? Normally I'd do it, but there are a bunch of directories here with "**" before where a decision needs to be made wrt overlapping tests or not. |
|
@foolip Three of the conflicts could be resolved by making exceptions for individual tests that have recently been attributed to other web-features. The other three are contestation for entire directories:
I originally proposed that these should be classified as That's why I removed those directories from this patch. Let me know what you think! |
|
I'm not clear on the exact boundary between fetch and HTTP in practice. In principle fetch is fairly simple and clearly sits on top of HTTP, but in some cases fetch overrides HTTP for reasons of web compat. I'll review and see if there are borderline cases left. |
foolip
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have low confidence in what approach will stand the test of time here, and we've usually tended to avoid overlap, but when the boundary between features and specs isn't so clear, I'm not sure what to do.
| features: | ||
| - name: http11 | ||
| files: | ||
| - parsing-nosniff.window.js |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this is testing the details of https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#x-content-type-options-header so it's more fetch than HTTP/1.1.
| - http-response-code.any.js | ||
| - name: http2 | ||
| files: | ||
| - status.h2.any.js |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is indeed testing H2, but it's also about statusText which is fetch, so it makes sense that it's not excluded above.
| files: "**" | ||
| files: | ||
| - "*" | ||
| - "!authentication-basic.any.js" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fetch does say things about the Authorization header, but I'm unsure about the boundary. Maybe actually let the classifications overlap, and don't exclude here?
| files: "**" | ||
| files: | ||
| - "*" | ||
| - "!basic-auth-cache-test.html" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Same.
| files: "**" | ||
| files: | ||
| - "*" | ||
| - "!open-url-base.htm" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure about the boundary, so maybe we can keep everything mapped to XHR with "**" and also classify some specific tests for other features?
Hello, reviewers! As of 2025-12-05, the wpt-pr-bot is requesting reviews from code owners for changes to WEB_FEATURES.yml files. To learn more about the purpose of these files, check out this presentation from TPAC 2025, Annotating WPT to Surface the Status of the Platform.
Matching test files for HTTP authentication
./fetch/http-cache(12 non-matching test files hidden)
./fetch/api/credentials./xhr(192 non-matching test files hidden)
(99 non-matching test files hidden)