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

RE: Question on Microsoft's min-width-percentage-003.xht test

From: Arron Eicholz <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 21:28:38 +0000
To: "css21testsuite@gtalbot.org" <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
CC: "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Message-ID: <651D2A831D17C040B828D62270386CE9299B973B@TK5EX14MBXC132.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
>> Note if we remove this case then we need a case that can prove that 
>> the text in the spec is valid. Or we need to remove the text since it 
>> isn't testable.
>
>Realistically speaking, how can an user agent fail such test?

User agents can only fail this test if they crash or fail to render anything on the page. In my opinion this is not really testing for the user agents its just for the spec coverage itself.

> Mr Eicholz: One "nitpick" correction to do about

Not 'nitpicky' at all. In fact I appreciate your attention to detail and finding issues like this.

> min-width-percentage-002.xht
>
> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/microsoft/submitted/Chapter_10/min-width-percentage-002.xht
>
> The meta assert says
> "If the containing block's width is negative, ..."
>
> but the containing block's width is:
>
>            div
>            {
>                margin-right: -10px;
>                width: 0;
>            }
>
>so negative or 0 has to be corrected.

I have corrected both cases now (min-width-percentage-002 and max-width-percentage-002). Please feel free to take a look. They now end up with a calculated width that is negative. This should now properly cover this scenario.

--
Thanks,
Arron Eicholz


-----Original Message-----
From: Gérard Talbot [mailto:css21testsuite@gtalbot.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 11:50 AM
To: Arron Eicholz
Cc: public-css-testsuite@w3.org
Subject: RE: Question on Microsoft's min-width-percentage-003.xht test


> The point of the test case is to prove that the spec can actually be 
> tested. All these tests are not necessarily written to test user 
> agents they are first written to prove that a case can be written to 
> actually see if it is feasible to get into the situation. This is such a case.
>
> The test is testing the specific assertion in the specification; 
> though the pass condition text is incorrect. The pass conditions 
> should state "Test passes if there is anything displayed below." I 
> have just updated the test case with the updated pass conditions.


I understand Microsoft's approach to testing any statement or definition or situation covered in CSS 2.1 spec which can be tested (or testcase-able). Such approach is definitely systematic, methodical and thorough and it is praiseworthy, impressive: I have said so publicly twice in the past (and recently) to your colleague Dean Hachamovitch.
But here, I thought this systematic approach was going a bit too far.


> Note if we remove this case then we need a case that can prove that 
> the text in the spec is valid. Or we need to remove the text since it 
> isn't testable.

Realistically speaking, how can an user agent fail such test?

> If you can think of a better test than this great please submit it.

Personally, I would not have submitted such test, because, objectively speaking, there is no fail condition.

"[ ] The test fails obviously whenever it fails."
CSS Test Review Checklist, Test design
http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/review-checklist

> At this point however this test covers the line in the spec.



Nota bene:

Mr Eicholz: One "nitpick" correction to do about

min-width-percentage-002.xht

http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/microsoft/submitted/Chapter_10/min-width-percentage-002.xht

The meta assert says
"If the containing block's width is negative, ..."

but the containing block's width is:


            div
            {
                margin-right: -10px;
                width: 0;
            }

so negative or 0 has to be corrected.

best regards, Gérard Talbot
P.S.: I will be unable to reply to emails for the next few days.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-css-testsuite-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-css-testsuite-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Gérard 
> Talbot
> Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 4:17 PM
> To: public-css-testsuite@w3.org
> Subject: Question on Microsoft's min-width-percentage-003.xht test
>
> Hello,
>
> Regarding
>
> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/microsoft/submitted/Chapter_
> 10/min-width-percentage-003.xht
>
> I would like to understand why such test. If the test assert says
>
> "
> If the containing block's width depends on this element's width, then 
> the resulting layout is undefined.
> "
>
> (which is also what CSS 2.1 section 10.4 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#min-max-widths
> is saying)
>
> then what is such test testing exactly? What's the point (value,
> usefulness) of such test?
>
> If the words "Filler Text" are not there in some user agent, then how 
> does such absence constitute a failure or some sort of spec violation?
>
> Am I missing something?
>
> regards, Gérard
Received on Wednesday, 6 January 2010 21:29:21 GMT

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