W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > April 2011

[RC6] line-box-height-001: title and text assert wrong

From: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 12:04:15 -0700
Message-ID: <5b8630640b33df459dcfa97a2a0a2cfc.squirrel@cp3.shieldhost.com>
To: "Arron Eicholz" <arron.eicholz@microsoft.com>
Cc: "Bruno Fassino" <fassino@gmail.com>, "Public CSS test suite mailing list" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Arron,

http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/line-box-height-001.htm

http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/line-box-height-001.htm

1-
<title>CSS Test: Height for inline elements when 'line-height' is
smaller than 'height'</title>

The height of content area (inline element) is independent from a set
line-height. In the testcase, the span has a font-size of 1in and a
line-height of 0. The line box's height for such <span> does not
increase because of the <span> font-size of 1in.

The title as written misleads.

2-
<meta name="assert" content="The 'line-height' property sets the initial
height but that height is increased if the content height is larger.">

The text assert has more difficulties.

"initial height" of what? Of the inline element would be wrong.

We believe the assert text meant to say "initial height of line box for
a block level element". In any case, the text assert should try to
minimize/eliminate source of interpretation.

"that height" must refer to the height of line box.

And "if the content height is larger". I think "larger" word is not best
when referring to/describing a vertical size/measurement. "taller" would
be my preference.
And "content height" should explicitly specify, identify inline elements.

In the testcase, the line-height for the wrapping div is specifically
set to 1em. Such wrapping div does not have any inline box with greater
(taller) than 1in content area. So, the text assert, as it was meant,
oriented, as it was intended, does not apply here.

The most important problem with the testcase is its possible (and
misleading) interpretation.

Credits must go to Bruno Fassino for his second opinion.

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

CSS 2.1 Test suite RC6, March 23rd 2011
http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/toc.html

CSS 2.1 test suite contributors:
http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/
Received on Thursday, 14 April 2011 19:04:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 14 April 2011 19:04:54 GMT