W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-svg-wg@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: Unapproving SVG 1.1F2 tests

From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 10:05:14 +1200
To: Erik Dahlstrom <ed@opera.com>
Cc: public-svg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20110504220514.GB6238@wok.mcc.id.au>
Erik Dahlstrom:
> here are my thoughts on possibly unapproving some tests that
> currently have fewer than two passing implementations[1].
> 
> - filters-light-03-f
>   Prefer it if it stays, depends on mozilla patch status - ACTION-3027 [2].

This won’t be able to land immediately.  Some more (Gecko) tests need to
be written before it can be checked in.  I agree we can leave the test
in and note that unofficial Firefox builds pass it.

> - fonts-desc-04-t, fonts-desc-05-t
>   Unapproving these is ok with me, it's somewhere between testing
> svgfonts and CSS fontmatching/fallbacks.

Agree.

> - painting-render-02-b
>   Has two passes counting ASV, so incorrectly flagged in the table.

Agree.

> - text-dom-04-f
>   Tried my best to convert the used SVGFont to WOFF but sadly failed
> to get the desired results, see ACTION-2957 [3] for details. I'm
> fine with unapproving the test until that can be worked out.

Thanks for trying, agree.

> - text-dom-05-f
>   I'm ok with unapproving this for now so that we can revisit the
> text DOM methods in SVG2.

It’s a larger change than I thought in Gecko, so I can’t get this done.
Agree that it’s OK to drop.

> - text-intro-02-b, text-intro-09-b
>   These are passed in Opera 11 and Chromium 13 (and also I think in
> the webkit nightly that was used in the table). The reference image
> was incorrect on the third line, but that's now been fixed. Just
> needs retesting and an update to the results xml-files.

Great!

-- 
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Wednesday, 4 May 2011 22:05:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 4 May 2011 22:05:51 GMT