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

RE: duplicated tests in section 14.1

From: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 17:41:10 -0800
Message-ID: <210163e7db4961ece3557705cc6d26d5.squirrel@cp3.shieldhost.com>
To: "Arron Eicholz" <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>
Cc: "css21testsuite@gtalbot.org" <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>, "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>

> Gérard Talbot wrote:
>>
>> 2- Arron:
>>
>> All the Microsoft tests in section 14.1 are duplicated.
>>
>
> Duplicated with which tests?

Please visit:

http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/20100127/html4/chapter-14.htm

There are 2 occurences of

http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/20100127/html4/color-001.htm

listed. Consecutively. In section 14.1.

And this doubled testcases phenomenon persists until

{
Color applied to elements with 'display' set to 'table-caption'
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/20100127/html4/color-applies-to-015.htm
}


So that means there are 174 + 15 testcases (all Microsoft) which have
doubled entries in the same section 14.1.

> I see no boundary test cases for any of the
> RGB values except for the ones we submitted. Could you point me to some
> of the files that they are duplicated to? Pointing to the
> background-color test cases is not accurate because an implementation
> can implement color and background-color in separate ways and at
> separate times.

They are all under section 14.1. The doubled testcases are all in
section 14.1 in

http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/20100127/html4/chapter-14.htm


I take one randomly, say,

http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/20100127/html4/color-102.htm

and such testcase has:

{
<link rel="help"
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/colors.html#propdef-color">
        <link rel="help"
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/colors.html#colors">
}

and both of those linked specification references point to the
almost-same exact spot in the CSS 2.1 spec.

There is no color versus background-color issue here.



> We cannot make assumptions how implementers will
> implement features thus the appearance of duplication in some/many
> tests.
>
>> Mere guess here: there are 2 link rel="help"
>>
>> {
>> eg
>>  <link rel="help"
>> href="http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/colors.html#propdef-color">
>>  <link rel="help"
>> href="http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/colors.html#colors">
>> }
>>  which point to the same reference, same spot in the CSS 2.1 spec when
>> I
>> think only
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/colors.html#colors
>>
>> should be used since
>>
>> "Links should link to relevant sections within the CSS 2.1
>> Specification
>>
>> Use the anchors from the CSS 2.1 Specification Table of Contents "
>>
>> http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/format#specification-links
>>
>
> There are both help links because the first help link is more accurate
> to what is actually being tested. The second is pointing to the section
> heading in the TOC.

In my opinion, linking to
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/colors.html#propdef-color
is *_not_* ok
and linking to
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/colors.html#colors
is ok and sufficient.


> The guidelines need to be updated to clarify that
> this is a good practice though not a required practice.
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Arron Eicholz

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

CSS 2.1 test suite (alpha 1; January 27th 2010):
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/current/html4/

CSS 2.1 test suite contributors:
http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/
Received on Tuesday, 2 February 2010 01:41:46 GMT

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