W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > September 2017

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-ui] Review of the optional test failures in the css-ui-3 test suite

From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2017 23:37:18 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-327640916-1504741029-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
The Working Group just discussed `Review of the optional test failures in the css-ui-3 test suite`, and agreed to the following resolutions:

* `RESOLVED: Leave spec as-is, no changes. Accept all current req. as listed in issue.`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;dael> Topic: Review of the optional test failures in the css-ui-3 test suite<br>
&lt;dael> Github:  https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1770<br>
&lt;Rossen_> someone is typing<br>
&lt;Rossen_> please mute if you're not talking<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: During the previous F2F I reported about thestsuite status. Close to done and passing. Optional tests don't pass for a lot. tantek suggested we review<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: In the GH issue you have the list of what fails and hwy. First list is nothing passes, second is only 1 passing. Short summary I think we're okay. Most of these are may tests.<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: I think that's fine.<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: There's a bunch of failing may tests, but there are a few that aren't and we can talk about<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: First is outline 005 which says the outline should follow the border edge. It fails in all browsers. In Safari this happens when outline-style is auto.<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: I think this is fine. This is a thing we knew about when we decided. I feel okay with that.<br>
&lt;dael> ??: What are you proposing here?<br>
&lt;hober> s/??/myles/<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: I'm suggesting this is all fine. Or we decide this optional fails are bad. I don't think we need a change, but tantek suggested reiew so I'm going through the list.<br>
&lt;dael> fremy: It does to me.<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: First is currently all browsers in most cases don't round the outline when the border radius is round. Safari does it when it's auto. Are we happy with spec as-is?<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Spec is should?<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: Yes.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Okay. Anyone unhappy with this? If not we can move on.<br>
&lt;dael> [silence]<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: Right.<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: Next 4 are outline 13-16. FF passes 13, everyone fails the rest. If you put a negative outline and if you put a large one and it meets in the middle. The spec has error handling to keep the outline from disappearing when it meets itself.<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: Everybody that's failing fails differently. This is a should. I think this should stay, it's a rare error case. most browsers do bad, FF less bad. So it sounds reasonable to me.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Unless anyone objects we can move on.<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: Text overflow 18. Spec suggests when you have text overflow ellipsis, when the userselects the ellipsis the spec suggests the user selects the test behind the ellipsis. This is a should. Sueegested behavior seems more friendly. Is this musguided?<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: This borders with editing and we shouldn't difine editing, but I'm fine with a should<br>
&lt;dael> ??: Should is a stronger verb<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Are you suggesting may?<br>
&lt;fantasai> s/??/hober/<br>
&lt;dauwhe> s/??:/hober/<br>
&lt;dael> ??: I think we should file bugs on the browsers.<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: I think I have filed bugs on most of this.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Let's continue unless there's a strong reason to not have a should.<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: Next ones are resize tests. Normally resize only applied to overflow something not visiable. We have a may to allow applying to a long list of other things. Safari and chomre do iframes. No one does anything else. Bugs are filed. This is may. i'm fine as is<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Fine to me.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Looks good. Next is cursor?<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: Yes. Cursor takes url pointing to an image. In newer specs we have url or a list of other options. You may support these in addition to image. No one supports. It's a may.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: We're fine on the edge side.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Next is cursor text 002<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: If you have horizontal text the text should be vertical. If you have transform rotate the cursor can angle to the text roate. It's a may.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Sounds reasonable. It's a more advanced feature.<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: Could happen on svg with a path. It opens the door.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Okay. There 4 more optional tests with 1 pass? Can we go through those as a group?<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: Since we have one pass, 3 should and 1 may I'm okay with a blanket this is fine.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: I think everyone can go individually. I want to be mindful of time.<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: Understand.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: So 4 optional test, FF passes 3, Safari passes the 4th.<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: And the last two are subcases we've discussed.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: If no obj we can call all of those resolved so this issue is resolved and closed.<br>
&lt;dael> fremy: 21 is weird. [reads] I don't know how you'd do it, but FF does. All the other ones I'm fine.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: I didn't catch all, but it didn't sound like an obj. Does anyone obj or want something different?<br>
&lt;dael> RESOLVED: Leave spec as-is, no changes. Accept all current req. as listed in issue.<br>
&lt;Florian> https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/6934<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: CSS UI status update.<br>
&lt;dael> Florian: One PR for one test with a should that passes in 1 browser. Once someone approves all except 2 tests pass in 2 impl. I've filed bugs on those two. I'll paste in IRC><br>

GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1770#issuecomment-327640916 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 6 September 2017 23:37:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:41:17 UTC