W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2011

RE: [css3] [css21] browser specific CSS

From: Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 19:50:31 -0700
Message-ID: <4e575c1d986a386374110942058d7456.squirrel@cp3.shieldhost.com>
To: "Brian Manthos" <brianman@microsoft.com>
Cc: "www-style@gtalbot.org" <www-style@gtalbot.org>, "Glenn Linderman" <v+html@g.nevcal.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "Alan Gresley" <alan@css-class.com>

Le Ven 1 avril 2011 19:02, Brian Manthos a écrit :
> That's not what I said either.  Note that I didn't reference CSS, much
> less CSS 2.1, directly.

Brian,

I would appreciate if you could quote, avoid top-posting and interleave
your reply. It makes reading a thread a lot more convenient.


> My general point is that if people spent as much of their fire on test
> writing as they do on workarounds the ecosystem would get better very
> quickly.

I share this point of view too. If web authors would report what they
believe/think is a browser bug to the browser manufacturer, then this
would contribute constructively to a better web. Many browsers now even
have a button in the help menu for this and they have crash report
capability or something similar. All of them have a bug tracking system;
except for Microsoft and Opera, they are public.

If users upgrade when there is a more recent browser version available,
then they generally should be better (stability, security, web standards
compliance, speed, etc.), otherwise they should switch to another browser.

>
>
> That said, since you brought it up...
>
> Not to take anything away from it the test suite, but 9418 is "round-off
> error" small compared to the number of pages on the web and the number of
> cases that each page represents.

Some of those 9418 tests are complex, compound tests, webpage scenario,
edge cases, extreme testing. I believe the current CSS 2.1 test suite is
covering well the spec. It may not be 100% coverage but it should not be
far or very far from 100% coverage.

Once CSS 2.1 becomes public recommendation, additional testcases can be
submitted to the CSS 2.1 test suite.

> And that's just today's pages.  Not
> tomorrow's pages that people like Glenn are working on now.
>
> - Brian

I am not sure I understand what you mean by this.

Glenn is claiming that only a tiny subset of what he calls "CSS" is
consistently supported by current browsers (I'll find his exact quote if
we need to go this far). That strikes me as an over-excessive exaggeration
and an utterly unsubstantiated claim. A very wide and large chunk of CSS
2.1 is supported correctly by current browsers (IE8+, Firefox 3.6+, Opera
11, Chrome 10+, Konqueror 4.6+).

Gérard



>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: "Gérard Talbot" [mailto:www-style@gtalbot.org]
>> Le Ven 1 avril 2011 2:04, Brian Manthos a écrit :
>> > Alan hits on a good point here.  IMO, one of the weakest points in
>> the
>> > interoperability story right now is the lack of tests.
>> There is right now 9418 testcases in the latest version of CSS 2.1 test
>> suite
>> [RC6]. I would not say that the weakest point of CSS 2.1 test suite is
>> the lack
>> of tests.
>
>


-- 
CSS 2.1 Test suite RC6, March 23rd 2011
http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/toc.html

Contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/

Web authors' contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/web-authors-contributions-css21-testsuite.html
Received on Saturday, 2 April 2011 02:51:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:39 GMT