W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2004

RE: [CSS21] Test Suite

From: Mark Moore <mark.moore@notlimited.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 19:44:17 -0700
To: <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20040722024749.74EF2A0637@frink.w3.org>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf
> Of Lachlan Hunt
> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 6:13 PM
> To: Mark Moore
> Cc: www-style@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [CSS21] Test Suite
> 
> 
> Mark Moore wrote:
> 
> > Due to various limitations (primarily of IE6), neither the 'xhm', nor
> the
> > 'xml' extensions are particularly good.  If the tests are renamed with
> the
> > xhtml extension, the tests can be loaded using Firefox, Mozilla, Opera,
> > *and* IE6.
> 
>    No, they cannot.  Obviously, you didn't try it before posting this.
> XHTML files are rejected by IE.

Lachlan,

Thanks for taking the time to respond, and I'm sorry it was obvious to you I
didn't "try it" before I posted.

In fact, I had tried viewing the XHTML tests with IE6, and have just now
tried it again.  You should find an attached GIF if you would like to see
for your self.



> When opened from the local file system,
> IE launches the default application for that extension (eg. Mozilla
> Firefox on my system), and when served from the network correctly as
> application/xhtml+xml, then IE presents a save dialog.

I didn't experience this behavior.



> XML, served as
> text/xml and (I believe) application/xml are treated as generic XML,
> since it does not recognise the namespace or doctype, and thus will not
> processed or styled as XHTML.

My experience is that IE6 does recognize the DOCTYPE.  In fact, it attempts
to (incorrectly) parse the referenced DTD.



> However, styles can still be applied
> using the <?xml-stylesheet?> PI.

Didn't try that.



> > For the interested, '.xml' files cause IE6 to parse the identified DTD
> > (xhtml11.dtd).  The DTD for XHTML 1.1 is modular, and IE6 incorrectly
> barfs
> > on the missing but IGNORE'd xhtml-prefw-redecl.mod.
> 
>    We are aware of IE6's many bugs, and that it does *not* support XHTML
> at all.
> 
> > In addition, IE6 uses the "file extension" to determine which
> application
> > should handle the received content even though URI's don't have file
> > extensions.  For URI's ending in '.xht', IE6 attempts to open the
> (unknown)
> > associated application, and the user is presented with a useless "Open
> > With..." dialog.
> 
>    This is contradictory to what you said above.  First, you said the IE
> doesn't support .xml, and now your saying it doesn't support .xht(ml).
> Althought, this time, you are correct: it does not support .xht(ml), but
> does support .xml.
> 
> > 3) PNG images are used in 75 of the tests, while GIF images are used in
> 4.
> > The use of PNG's doesn't add anything to the tests, yet eliminates UA's
> that
> > don't render this format (most notably IE6).
> 
>    IE does support PNG, except for alpha transparancy.  So this is not a
> problem, unless the images do contain alpha transparency.  And if they
> do, I would assume the use of transparency is likely to be important for
> the test, so PNGs must be used anyway, if that is the case.

It looks like I may have been too hasty with my assessment of IE6's
rendering of PNG's from the barrage of IE-does-too-handle-PNG's responses.

So you can see how I came to this conclusion, I've attached a GIF of both
Opera 7.51, and IE6 rendering the css1test412a.xhtml test.

The PNG is clearly missing, and I simply wasn't thorough enough, or
experienced enough, to find the transparency issue before you pointed it
out.  Thanks for the tip.

Although, it does look like the PNG has transparent pixels, the test still
looks like it could be redone using a GIF.

Maybe the suggestion should be to use PNG's with out transparency, (and
convert the handful of GIF's to PNG).  On the other hand, GIF's have been
around much longer, and seem to have broader, more consistent rendering, so
I'm still leaning toward expressing the CSS 2.1 conformance test suite in
terms of GIF's, and not PNG's.

FYI, the only change between css1test412a.xhtml and the .xml version from
Ian's test suite is the rename.  Just in case, it's attached as well so you
can diff for yourself, or reproduce the failure.


> 
> --
> Lachlan Hunt
> 
> lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au
> http://www.lachy.id.au/



Received on Wednesday, 21 July 2004 22:47:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:31 GMT