W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-perf@w3.org > February 2012

Re: [requestAnimationFrame] Test Suite

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 17:03:29 -0500
Message-ID: <4F4D4F31.9030308@mit.edu>
To: public-web-perf@w3.org
On 2/28/12 2:47 PM, Jatinder Mann wrote:
> Karen has submitted the requestAnimationFrame test suite to the
> submission folder. Please take a moment to review the test suite and
> provide feedback.

The tests should be testing cancelAnimationFrame, not 
cancelRequestAnimationFrame, right?

There should probably be more extensive testing of the processing model. 
  Since I know for a fact, based on previous discussion on this list, 
that what WebKit and IE implement in this regard is quite different, if 
they're both passing the tests that means the tests are not testing 
enough of the "interesting" cases.

Maybe that's OK; I doubt those cases actually matter in practice.  But 
maybe it's not if we think we'll ever want actual interop there.

Things that probably need additional testing are at least ordering of 
callbacks within and across documents and behavior on cancellation of a 
callback from inside another callback.  I'm pretty sure Gecko would fail 
that last one right now, for example.

> We have verified that IE10 and Chrome pass the test suite. Boris, can
> you check Firefox?

Whether Firefox passes depends on various external factors (machine 
load, etc), because of the timing-dependent part of the test.  Of course 
the same is true for Chrome when I just tested it, and I wasn't even 
testing with any particular load on the processor...

I'm not sure what normative requirement those tests are testing in the 
first place, of course.  The only support for the "should fire at 60Hz" 
bit seems to be an informative note.  Those tests should not be part of 
a conformance test suite for this feature, imo, though they can be part 
of an optional "quality of implementation" test if someone wants.

Firefox passes all the non-timing-dependent tests.

-Boris
Received on Tuesday, 28 February 2012 22:04:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 28 February 2012 22:04:01 GMT