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

Re: absolute-replaced-width-016/017/018 incorrect

From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 16:34:24 -0700
To: public-css-testsuite@w3.org
Message-ID: <20101013233424.GA15282@pickering.dbaron.org>
On Wednesday 2010-10-13 16:32 -0700, L. David Baron wrote:
> The tests:
> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20100917/xhtml1/absolute-replaced-width-016.xht
> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20100917/xhtml1/absolute-replaced-width-017.xht
> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20100917/xhtml1/absolute-replaced-width-018.xht
> appear to me to be incorrect.
> 
> The svg element in these tests has no intrinsic ratio and no
> intrinsic size, since it has no viewBox and no height/width
> attributes.  (I'd have expected it to be 300x150 as a result, but
> our implementation seems to be shrinking it so it fits within the
> container.  I'm not sure if I'm missing something in the spec or if
> that's a bug in our implementation, though.  If nobody else is
> confident about the rules, I could try to figure out why we're doing
> what we're doing.)
> 
> Nonetheless, given the size of the svg element, the blue box should
> begin either in the upper *left* corner of the black box, or
> actually slightly to the left of that.
> 
> Additionally, in -018, the margin-left and margin-right aren't
> actually set to auto as the test assertion says they should be.

And I think these problems appear through the other SVG tests in the
series as well.  It's just this particular triplet is the only
triplet that fails as a result of these issues.

-David

-- 
L. David Baron                                 http://dbaron.org/
Mozilla Corporation                       http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Wednesday, 13 October 2010 23:34:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 13 October 2010 23:34:58 GMT