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

Re: [CSS21] Test Suite

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 02:55:03 +0200
Message-ID: <1267410014.20040723025503@w3.org>
To: "Mark Moore" <mark.moore@notlimited.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org

On Friday, July 23, 2004, 1:07:19 AM, Mark wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf
>> Of Chris Lilley

>> I agree for the xhtml tests; for the xml tests that are not (supposed to
>> be ) xhtl (although they are obfuscated xhtml) .xml is appropriate.

MM> Again, I'm probably missing something.  All of the tests are pretty clearly
MM> XHTML 1.1.  (Every single file includes the <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC
MM> "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN"
MM> "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">
MM> signature.)

Okay. Yes, you are missing something (and Iwas not aware you were
missing it).

The idea is that the source of the tests is in XHTML, from which three
sets of tests are generated

a) HTML 4 test, served as text/html
b) XHTML test, served as application/xhtml+xml
c) 'XML' (mangled tagname) tests, not in XHTML namespace, served as

Without that vital bit of information I understand why you did not come
to the same conclusions that others did.

>> Yes (although wasn't that fixed in the latest msxml?)

MM> Apparently not.  I'm testing with IE 6.0.2800.1106.

Although MSXML is a separate download, to get the latest version, or was
when I looked.

>> In that case there should be a separate test that tests this specific
>> feature.

MM> Testing the handling of '<' and '&' in the <style> element content tests
MM> XHTML conformance, not CSS conformance.  (I couldn't find anything in CSS
MM> that calls these characters out.)  No need to test that here, right?

Where would it be tested? In the HTML test suite? (coughs hollowly up
sleeve). Its an example of something tat is at the intersection of two
specifications; there is a danger it goes untested.

>> MM>  Although css1test11.xml contains a '<', it works without the CDATA
>> MM> section markers because the XHTML parser sees this as a comment,
>> I find that very worrying. <!-- and --> with no intervening - is a
>> comment.

MM> Yep, exactly, but the XHTML parser is looking for the </style> end tag, '&'
MM> entities, or general SGML tag errors.  It should (and seems to) pass the
MM> content including the SGML comment on to the CSS parser.

Only if its in a CDATA marked section ;-)  Otherwise its looking for
opening tags of child elements, too.

>> I suggest altering the remaining 4 GIFs to PNG unless they are animated.

MM> I'd be all for that.  (They're not, BTW.)

Okay, I can rest easy then.

>> There comes a point where, if the implementation is crappy, you have to
>> say so.

MM> Whaling on IE6 misses my point.  If you write tests narrowly, you
MM> arbitrarily eliminate UA's (beyond IE6).  I'm thinking of handhelds,
MM> set-tops, and the like.

Hand held and set top boxes tend to implement XHTML Basic and do a
better job than some desktop browsers. i'm not unfairly hitting on
Win/IE; I m saying that designing tests that carefully dodge around its
bugs is a PR exercise not a test suite.

However, since you wrote that without realizing there would be HTML 4,
XHTML and XML tests generated from the same source, i can understand
your concern.

>> MM> I would recommend converting 28 distinct PNG's to GIF. I would be
>> MM> happy to provide this conversion if that would help.
>> No, it would not (file format conversion is trivial, especially in this
>> case), and I would oppose this change.

MM> Chris, I might be able to get behind you on this, but I'll need a little
MM> more explanation.  Is there some particular reason or justification you
MM> might elaborate?

PNG is a W3C Recommendation. Its freely implementable and well
specified. GIF is not available on some platforms, is not freely
implementable world wide, and is generally an inferior format.

>> On the other hand that is a much better suggestion.

MM> Thanks!

 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
Received on Thursday, 22 July 2004 20:55:03 UTC

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