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

Re: background-root-004/005/006/007/008/009/010/013 have incorrect pass conditions

From: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2010 03:48:46 -0800
Message-ID: <44f8d0e6dff227d006e346fb0a910c0c.squirrel@cp3.shieldhost.com>
To: "fantasai" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>

Le Ven 3 décembre 2010 23:52, fantasai a écrit :
> On 10/13/2010 08:55 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
>> The pass conditions of the tests
>> background-root-004/005/006/007/008/009/010/013 incorrectly imply or
>> require that the background of the root element does not extend
>> outside the root element's border.  The wording varies; in some
>> cases it caused me to mark the test as failing and in some cases it
>> didn't.  But I think it should be improved in all of these cases.
> I've updated the pass conditions for all of these tests. Let me
> know if this is adequate.
> ~fantasai




and in


"should be a line of squares"

I would use and continue to use "white tile" just like in many other
background-root-* testcases.

Or even better (my preference): to use "bathroom tiles" (because it is
intuitive) like in some other background-root-* testcases. Using and
reusing systematically the same expression for the same image should
contribute to make this univocal to testers and easy to figure out.

/s/should be a line of squares/should be a line of white tiles/
/s/should be a line of squares/should be a line of bathroom tiles/

regards, Gérard
Contributions to the CSS 2.1 test suite:

CSS 2.1 test suite (RC3; October 27th 2010):

CSS 2.1 test suite contributors:
Received on Sunday, 5 December 2010 11:49:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:13:22 UTC