RFC 73 : Add testdriver.js support for the timeZone WebDriver command.
#73
Conversation
stephenmcgruer
changed the title
timeZone WebDriver command.timeZone WebDriver command.
rfcs/testdriver_set_time_zone.md
Outdated
| ## Summary | ||
| Add testdriver.js support for the `timeZone` WebDriver extension, which will | ||
| allow setting the current timezone in the browser. This extension is specced as | ||
| part of the [HTML spec](https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/3047). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The proposed text is currently in this comment: whatwg/html#3047 (comment)
This RFC should not be merged until the comment text is (a) part of the PR, and (b) the PR is either landed or fully LGTM'd and about to be landed.
Ultimately this link should be updated to point at the relevant HTML spec section rather than a PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My comment text is now part of the PR: whatwg/html#3047
stephenmcgruer
force-pushed
the
smcgruer/timezonechange_testdriver
branch
from
6797392 to
375e23f
Compare
| Changing the time zone is not available via normal web APIs. To test the effect | ||
| of changing time zone on the `ontimezonechange` event there needs to be a way | ||
| to instruct the browser to act as if the time zone is changing: this WebDriver | ||
| extension provides that ability. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Worth mentioning that this command is also useful to test PWAs that take into account the user's local time zone? IOW, it's useful even if timezonechange didn't exist.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are you thinking from the context of WPT still, or from the context of a web-developer (or PWA developer) who might want to test their site/app?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh yeah, I was talking about the WebDriver command, not the testdriver.js change. Ignore me! :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not at all - that info helps inform us that this WebDriver extension is probably useful outside of the scope of WPT. Those tend to be even easier to accept, since there's a valid use for them in the 'real world' :)
Co-authored-by: Mathias Bynens <[email protected]>
|
Update re: @stephenmcgruer's earlier comment:
a) happened, but we're still working on b). |
|
As per current policy this can be added to testdriver without an RFC, so I'm going to close this issue, but that shouldn't be interpreted as a rejection; just file a PR on testdriver when the feature lands and it can go through the normal code review process. |
No description provided.