Scripts to extract xhr test suite metadata, annotate spec

[hallvors]

Nearly all tests in the XHR test suite have (potentially outdated) meta data linking them to specific assertations in the spec. (Technically this is a set of space-separated XPath expressions for each link @rel=help element which, combined with the section linked to from the HREF, identifies a given assertation).

Here's some code to actually make use of this data. One Python script to extract the meta data into a single JSON file, and one javascript to iterate over the resulting JSON data and annotate the spec.

To test, load http://www.w3.org/TR/XMLHttpRequest/ and run this from the browser's dev tools' console:

document.body.appendChild(document.createElement('script')).src='http://hallvord.com/temp/xhr/annotate_spec.js'

You may have to disable mixed content blocking in your browser if the spec loads over https.

[hoppipolla-critic-bot]

Critic review: https://critic.hoppipolla.co.uk/r/2772

This is an external review system which you may optionally use for the code review of your pull request.

In order to help critic track your changes, please do not make in-place history rewrites (e.g. via git rebase -i or git commit --amend) when updating this pull request.

[hallvors]

(I have no idea why Travis "build" fails)

[hallvors]

To be clear: the expected effect of running the script is

1. Every assertation that have at least one associated test, get a light green background
2. One or more link(s) to relevant test(s) are added after each assertation.

[gsnedders]

15:01 < aryehgregor> Um, I might have done something wrong by mistake.
15:01 < aryehgregor> I think I pushed to the wrong repo?

[annevk]

Note whatwg/xhr#119 which proposes closing this PR.

[wpt-pr-bot]

Notifying @Manishearth, @Ms2ger, @caitp, @emilio, @ibelem, @jdm, @jungkees, @kangxu, @mathiasbynens, and @ronkorving. (Learn how reviewing works.)