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

Re: About Microsoft test bottom-offset-002.xht and similar ones

From: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 09:19:32 -0800
Message-ID: <a44a522fea1c3bbde9ba62a3b79615bc.squirrel@cp3.shieldhost.com>
To: "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Cc: "Bruno Fassino" <fassino@gmail.com>, "Arron Eicholz" <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>

> The assert of
>   http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/microsoft/submitted/Chapter_9/bottom-offset-002.xht
> says:
>   "The 'bottom' property, for relative positioning, specifies the
> offset of the element in relation to the parent's bottom content edge"
> but that's not true.  For relatively positioned boxes, the offsets are
> with respect to the edges of the box itself.
> The same applies to the "right", "top" versions:
>   http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/microsoft/submitted/Chapter_9/right-offset-002.xht
>   http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/microsoft/submitted/Chapter_9/top-offset-002.xht

In those 3 testcases, the parent element acting as the containing block
has no padding, no border and no margin. So, those 3 tests are not
testing well what the spec defines and are created in a way that an
incorrect implementation may still succeed, may still pass those 3

Another thing is that the parent element acting as the containing block in
and in left-offset-002.xht
are relatively positioned when the other 2 (right-offset-002.xht and
top-offset-002.xht) testcases are not. There is no need to relatively
position the parent element in those bottom-offset-002.xht and
left-offset-002.xht testcases.

regards, Gérard
Contributions to the CSS 2.1 test suite:

CSS 2.1 test suite (alpha 1; January 27th 2010):

CSS 2.1 test suite contributors:
Received on Sunday, 28 February 2010 17:20:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:13:19 UTC