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

Re: [RC6] rgb(50%, ..., ...) or rgb(..., 50%, ...) or rgb(..., ..., 50%): fractional value!

From: Rebecca Hauck <rhauck@adobe.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 11:18:56 -0800
To: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
CC: Arron Eicholz <arron.eicholz@microsoft.com>, Public CSS test suite mailing list <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CCEF69E9.24B58%rhauck@adobe.com>


On 12/11/12 4:20 PM, "Gérard Talbot" <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org> wrote:

>
>Le Mar 11 décembre 2012 12:44, Rebecca Hauck a écrit :
>>
>>
>> On 12/7/12 2:29 PM, "Gérard Talbot" <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Le Ven 7 décembre 2012 15:55, Rebecca Hauck a écrit :
>>>>
>
>[snipped]
>
>>>As far as I am concerned, we can do 3 (I'm happy with such option) for
>>>cases with rgb(1%) and rgb(99%) as I said in
>>>
>>>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2012Dec/0012.ht
>>>ml
>>>
>>>which is:
>>>
>>>"
>>>3. Update the background-color cases to have 2 references one ref that
>>>is on either side of the value being defined.
>>>"
>>>
>>>I think we only need to tune the following 8 tests (so that they have 2
>>>references on either side) by doing 3.:
>>>
>>>http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-co
>>>lo
>>>r-049.htm
>>>
>>>http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-co
>>>lo
>>>r-054.htm
>>>
>>>http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-co
>>>lo
>>>r-070.htm
>>>
>>>http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-co
>>>lo
>>>r-075.htm
>>>
>>>http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-co
>>>lo
>>>r-090.htm
>>>
>>>http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-co
>>>lo
>>>r-095.htm
>>>
>>>http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-co
>>>lo
>>>r-110.htm
>>>
>>>http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-co
>>>lo
>>>r-115.htm
>>
>> Ok, great!  We'll go with #3 for this set of tests. May I change the
>> status of the others back to Approved or do you prefer to do it? It
>> appears I have permission to that.
>
>
>One issue here.
>
>Changeset: 4777:5211db770fe9
>
>I changed color-002 to color-063 tests so that they would be comparing
>to an image reference and not to background-color.
>
>When Arron says:
>
>"
>Though this only affects background-color cases really since those are
>the only ones that have the precision problem since they are compared to
>the image. Note we should double check all the other cases to confirm
>that they are not compared to other color formats.
>"
>
>I believe he means color-002 to color-063 tests should be reverted to
>what they were, that is comparing to background-color code.

Yes, I agree given what how we decided to handle the rest of the tests.
Would you like to make the changes in Shepherd or should I?


>
>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-contr
>ibutions-css21-testsuite.html
>
Received on Thursday, 13 December 2012 19:18:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 December 2012 19:18:47 GMT