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

RE: [CSS21] Test Suite

From: Mark Moore <mark.moore@notlimited.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 16:43:25 -0700
To: <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20040722234650.3435DA0B6A@frink.w3.org>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf
> Of Ian Hickson
> Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 3:33 PM
> To: Mark Moore
> Cc: www-style@w3.org; tantekc@microsoft.com
> Subject: RE: [CSS21] Test Suite
> This is only the case if you send the files as text/html, which is not
> allowed. (The tests in question are not XHTML 1 compliant to Appendix C.)

Just to be precise, this is only the case if the UA parses the document
using HTML rules which *is* allowed.

For Firefox, Mozilla, and Opera, this can be controlled by the Content-Type:
application/xhtml+xml -> XHTML parsing, text/html -> HTML parsing.  For
other UA's, this is demonstrably not the case.

> > I would suggest carefully limiting the number of tests that rely on the
> > Ahem font.  I believe most (if not all) of the Ahem tests can be
> > rewritten to accomplish the same effects using inline replaced elements.
> The existing tests are ports of the CSS1 tests to the CSS2.1 format and
> guidelines. Part of the intent of this port is to remain faithful to the
> original tests. Thus if the original tests did not use replaced elements,
> I would rather not use them in the new tests either.

But, none of the CSS1 tests used Ahem (which certainly demonstrates the
feasibility of writing the tests without requiring a font download while
remaining even more faithful to the original tests).

> > Clearly, precise testing of the font-size property will not benefit from
> > inline images, but there should be ways to test this property without
> > requiring Ahem.
> Any suggestions?
> > I would also suggest that a link to the Ahem download page [5] be
> > included either in the body, or in the head of any test that does
> > require the Ahem font.
> It will be included in the test suite introduction, probably. It cannot be
> included in the tests themselves as that introduces too many variables
> that can affect automated users of the test suite.

That makes complete sense.  You might want to add some simple README in the
meantime that points people in the right direction.
Received on Thursday, 22 July 2004 19:46:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:14 UTC