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

Re: [RC6] white-space-processing-056: false positives

From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2012 15:19:20 -0700
To: "Gérard Talbot" <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
Cc: Public CSS test suite mailing list <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20120811221920.GA8607@crum.dbaron.org>
On Thursday 2012-07-26 22:27 -0400, "Gérard Talbot" wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> [RC6]
> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/white-space-processing-056.htm
> 
> [nightly-unstable]
> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/white-space-processing-056.htm
> 
> As far as I can see this, Firefox 4.0.1 under XP SP3, Firefox 14.0.1
> under Linux KDE 4.8.4, Firefox 17.0.1a (nightly build 20120726) under XP
> SP3 and Safari 5.1.7 under XP SP3 fail such test.
> 
> The submitted implementation reports suggests otherwise.
> 
> I think the pass/fail conditions sentence is written in a way that is
> not so clear. What's a box? If an irregular polygon can be a "box", then
> it's a pass..

What behavior do you see?

I don't think the Ahem font provides a glyph for ideographic space,
so it seems that you'd get a glyph from a different font -- and I
could imagine the results being substantially different depending on
which font, and whether that font has an ideographic space that's
exactly 1em wide.

(I see a 1px gap in the middle of what "should be" a single box, but
nothing out of alignment.)

-David

-- 
𝄞   L. David Baron                         http://dbaron.org/   𝄂
𝄢   Mozilla                           http://www.mozilla.org/   𝄂
Received on Saturday, 11 August 2012 22:19:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 11 August 2012 22:19:52 GMT