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

Re: background-size-[002-024]: reviewed and most of them approved

From: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 18:51:11 -0500
Message-ID: <f83db5ec6ea9efb4b1e79ffabe4a885a.squirrel@ed-sh-cp3.entirelydigital.com>
To: "Zhang, Zhiqiang" <zhiqiang.zhang@intel.com>
Cc: "Public CSS testsuite mailing list@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>, "Santos, Thiago" <thiago.santos@intel.com>, "Zhang, Haili" <haili.zhang@intel.com>, "Yu, Ling L" <ling.l.yu@intel.com>, "Yang, Lei A" <lei.a.yang@intel.com>

Le Sam 10 novembre 2012 0:55, "Gérard Talbot" a écrit :
> Le Ven 9 novembre 2012 3:28, Zhang, Zhiqiang a écrit :
>>> Zhiqiang, let me know if you have more tests (and which tests) to
>>> review, to approve.
>>> Gérard
>>> --
>> Hi Gerard,
>> background-size-002 to 034 (except background-size-008 above) need to
>> be
>> reviewed again, and to be approved :).
> background-size-009, at line 21:
> I changed height: 100px to height: 50px;. This way, if width and height
> are not matched correctly and respectively to first and second values,
> then the green square will be small and testers will see red. By setting
> height: 50px, we reduce risks, chances of false positives; we reduce
> chances that a faulty implementation does not get caught by the test.
> Approved.
> background-size-011, at line 19:
> I changed support/60x60-green.png to support/50x50-green.png for reasons
> mentioned regarding Opera 12.10 and Linux inaccurate rounding APIs.
> Approved.
> background-size-014, at line 22:
> I changed width: 200px for width: 50px so that if the UA applies 45% to
> 50px (and not 200px), then the painted green area will be definitely
> smaller than 45px; with width: 200px, it would be 90px which is more
> than enough to cover the red square, in which case we wouldn't see a
> failure. By setting width: 50%, this restricts chances of false
> positive.
> Approved.
> background-size-017, at line 23:
> If 45% is incorrectly applied on width: 50px, then testers will red. If
> 45% is incorrectly applied on width: 200px, then we will *not* see red
> (although we won't see a green square but rather a green 90px by 45px
> rectangle). So, I replaced width: 200px with width: 50px to maximize
> possibilities to notice failures due to incorrect implementation.
> Approved.

I tried background-size-002, 005, 006, 012, 013, 015, 016, 018, 019 and
020 with IE8 and IE8 passes all those tests. Now, IE8 has no knowledge
or understanding of background-size. Therefore, IE8 should fail these
tests. So, these tests are not ideal; in fact, they are not adequate!

1) 002, 005, 006: these tests are testing default, initial
background-size: so there is nothing to change here. Testing default,
initial values is in practice impossible (unless you could edit the UA

2) 012, 013, 015, 016, 018, 019 and 020: these tests could be improved
in 2 different ways. Either by setting width to 50px or by using a very
small green background-image that would be required by the test to be
stretched, enlarged: ideally, this would be /support/1x1-green.png. In
all tests, you want the #test-green-overlapping to be - by default -
smaller than #ref-red-overlapped.

Ideally, when testing background-size, you want tests should fail if
background-size is set to 'auto'.

I will work on these tests again for you.

Contributions to the CSS 2.1 test suite:

CSS 2.1 Test suite RC6, March 23rd 2011:

CSS 2.1 test suite harness:

Contributing to to CSS 2.1 test suite:
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2012 23:51:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:13:25 UTC