- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2010 02:54:22 -0500
- To: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- CC: css21testsuite@gtalbot.org, "Public CSS 2.1 test suite mailing list" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
On 10/03/2010 06:27 PM, Simon Fraser wrote: > On Oct 3, 2010, at 2:35 pm, Gérard Talbot wrote: > >>> background-position-201 >>> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101001/html4/background-position-201.htm >>> States "the diamond should be moving around the edge of the outer >>> circle", but there is no outer circle visible >> >> Simon, >> >> I now see/understand what you are saying. Yes, there is only 1 visible >> circle (red ... which is a wrong color) and its orbital movement in the >> page forms a bigger circle. >> >> The testcase should probably explain this. >> >> The purple diamond should be moving inside the small circle according to >> the center of the large, outer circle. > > Suggested wording for this test: > > "There should be a circle with a diamond inside below. The diamond and the orange circle should be appear to be moving in a circle, around a common center point. The radius of motion of the diamond should be slightly shorter than that of the orange circle (measuring the radius to the center of each shape), so that the diamond is always near the side of the circle closer to the center of motion." Done. > Bonus points if the test actually shows a dot at the center of the circle of motion. I added a border instead, which should help as much. > The fact that it's hard to explain what the test should do indicates that it is not a good test. > >> One suggestion is to remove the "Position: % %" displayed calculations >> at the bottom of the page: it's not part of the testcase and its display >> unneedlessly requires display and system resources. > > Agreed. Commented out. ~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 7 December 2010 07:54:59 UTC