W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > August 2012

Re: [css3-conditional] Submitted a few TCs

From: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 13:22:02 -0400
Message-ID: <dd89dd0273faff893b8877f76312908d.squirrel@ed-sh-cp3.entirelydigital.com>
To: "Florian Rivoal" <florianr@opera.com>
Cc: "Public CSS test suite mailing list" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>

Le Ven 3 août 2012 9:40, Florian Rivoal a écrit :
> Alright, I've done all the changes you and Peter mentioned, except for
> number 5.
>
>> 5- The title text often seems to me to be more of a text assert
>> actually. The title text should just describe what the test involves.
>> The text assert should describe the goal, purpose, target, etc of a
>> test.
>>
>> Expressions like "should work", "should not work", "should apply",
>> "should not apply", "should parse", "should successfully parse", "be
>> parsed succesfully" in the title text suggest that these should be in
>> a
>> text assert instead.
>>
>> example given:
>> Actual:
>> at_supports_005.html
>> non-matching @media within @supports should not apply
>> at_supports_009.html
>> Negations of failing simple conditions in @supports should pass
>>
>> Proposals:
>> <title>CSS Test (Conditional Rules): Non-matching @media within
>> @supports</title>
>> <title>CSS Test (Conditional Rules): Negations of failing simple
>> conditions in @supports</title>
>>
>> You want the title text to just list, to just mention the
>> "ingredients"
>> of a test.
>> Eg.
>> <title>CSS Test: absolute position - bottom offset with percentage
>> unit</title>
>>
>> and you want the test assert text to describe or explain the
>> purpose/goal/target of the test. The assert text is aiming at the
>> reviewer, advanced testers, a spec careful reader, etc.
>
> I'll do it, but this isn't nearly as mechanical as the other
> changes you asked for, so I'll do it later.
>
>> Also, keep in mind that the flag invalid will indicate that a syntax
>> or
>> particular code should not succeed, should be ignored, should not
>> work,
>> should not "pass", etc.
>
> I used it on TCs which were still expected to work and display a
> filled green square when the browser did the right thing,
> but contained incorrect CSS syntax, as they are testing
> the parser's recovery mechanism. Is that appropriate use of this
> flag?

Yes, it is appropriate use. You added the flag invalid to tests which
needed to have such flag, to tests which contained incorrect CSS syntax,
to tests which triggered (or are supposed to trigger) parsing errors.

Gérard
-- 
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 harness:
http://test.csswg.org/harness/

Contributing to to CSS 2.1 test suite:
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/web-authors-contributions-css21-testsuite.html
Received on Friday, 3 August 2012 17:22:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 3 August 2012 17:22:40 GMT