RE: pixel-based vs. real-word-pased units

Is there going to be some sort of resolution on this? How things like
this are decided?

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: public-css-testsuite-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-css-testsuite-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Peter
Sorotokin
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 7:33 PM
To: Ian Hickson
Cc: public-css-testsuite@w3.org
Subject: RE: pixel-based vs. real-word-pased units


My point is that those tests as they are today are *incorrect* per
today's spec (and in my case they are likely to cause confusion for the
users and even for our own QEs). There is no much need for a flag in the
filename, but the language in the test could be more precise; for
instance, instead of "The two diagrams below should be identical, with
no red present", it could say, "If blue and green boxes below are of
equal length, than two diagrams below should be identical, with no red
present", with two additional boxes, green of width 1in and blue of
width 96px. There are maybe 10 tests that fall under that category.

It is perfectly understandable that web content has preferred treatment,
but not to the point of having the whole test suite being runnable only
on 96dpi display.

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Hickson [mailto:ian@hixie.ch] 
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 5:18 PM
To: Peter Sorotokin
Cc: public-css-testsuite@w3.org
Subject: RE: pixel-based vs. real-word-pased units

On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Peter Sorotokin wrote:
> > 
> > Not making that assumption breaks all kinds of Web pages. There was
a 
> > time several years ago where Mac browsers assumed 72dpi, and they
were 
> > universally having difficulties with important Web sites.
> 
> Hey, I am implementing the spec. Does the test suite test the
compliance 
> with the spec or the ability to render real-world Web content?

The test suite is primarily written by browser vendors and therefore 
primarily tests for CSS compliance in a Web context, which includes
making 
certain assumptions that are required for rendering Web content.

I would be happy to add a flag to the filename to indicate that the test

assumes Web browser characteristics (though that would probably flag
most 
tests -- all of them, if you consider HTML support to be a Web browser 
characteristic). I would also be happy to accept tests that don't make 
those assumptions. To contribute such tests, please see:

 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2006Aug/0000.ht
ml

It would be great to get tests from implementors who aren't Web browser 
vendors, since, as you imply, that has resulted in a bias in the test 
suite so far.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Friday, 22 September 2006 02:11:22 UTC