W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > April 2010

Microsoft's Chapter_9/display-005.htm needs to be reviewed, adjusted and corrected

From: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 20:30:30 -0700
Message-ID: <68aeba809eaf5485c6f86ca00e94da0d.squirrel@cp3.shieldhost.com>
To: "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Cc: "Arron Eicholz" <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>
Hello all,

Testcases involved are:

http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/microsoft/submitted/Chapter_9/display-005.htm

and

http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/20100316/html4/display-005.htm


I conducted many tests regarding those 2 testcases in many browsers
under Windows XP and under Linux KDE and as soon as I tried the testcase
in non-Windows operating systems, the testcase fails because the
font-family in use is not Times New Roman.

Under Windows XP with Internet Explorer 8
(Tools/Internet Options.../General tab/Fonts button/Language script:
Latin based/Webpage font), the following font in use will make the
testcase fails:

Code2000
Comic MS
Courier New
DejaVu Sans
DejaVu Serif
Georgia
Lucida Sans
Lucida Sans Unicode
Verdana

As you can see here:

 <style type="text/css">
            div div
            {
                display: inline-block;
                height: 50px;
                width: 150px;
            }
        </style>
(...)
        <div>
            Filler Text
            <div>Filler Text Filler Text</div>
        </div>

the testcase sets, imposes a restraining, constraining content width to
the inline-block. Unneedlessly. Unnecessarly. From a building logic,
there is no justification, no need to set a width to the inline-block to
begin with. The testcase does not need to set a width to the
inline-block in order to test what it aims at testing in that testcase
to start with.

I now believe that there are a good bunch/batch of testcases (I've seen
a bunch so far) where testcases set a restraining, constraining width to
a div or containing block (#div1) where there is no need to, no
justification to, no relevance in doing so. And then they may fail in
non-Windows os just because their default font-family make use of wider
glyphs.

regards, Gérard
-- 
Contributions to the CSS 2.1 test suite:
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/

CSS 2.1 test suite (alpha 2; March 16th 2010):
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/20100316/html4/toc.html

CSS 2.1 test suite contributors:
http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/
Received on Thursday, 29 April 2010 03:31:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 20 September 2010 17:52:01 GMT