- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 09:52:21 -0700
- To: "Gérard Talbot" <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
- Cc: "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
On Tuesday 2010-10-05 09:02 -0700, "Gérard Talbot" wrote: > According to you then, > > http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101001/html4/z-index-001.htm > > and > > http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101001/html4/z-index-012.htm > > must also be considered invalid testcases because there is no range > defined for z-index. They're not invalid because they're not testing that a value is rejected or truncated. However, they're probably better off not in the suite because they're testing values outside a "reasonable" range. And their asserts are wrong. > Wouldn't it be best if CSS2.1 would define explicitly an allowed range > for integer values for properties like counter-reset, counter-increment, > z-index, widows, orphans, etc? For negative integer values when > applicable. And also define explicitly what should happen when minimum > (floor) and maximum (ceiling) values are exceeded? Maybe. Or it could define a range that *must* be handled but still allow handling of values outside that range. -David -- L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ Mozilla Corporation http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Tuesday, 5 October 2010 16:53:20 UTC