- From: Stewart Brodie <stewart.brodie@antplc.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:21:41 +0000
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: public-css-testsuite@w3.org
You wrote: > Stewart Brodie wrote: > > fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > > > >> There's very little overhead for the permission granting form. You can > >> fill it out here: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/testgrants2-200409/ > > > > I have now done this. > > > > > >> The template for new tests is here: > >> http://csswg.inkedblade.net/test/css2.1/format > > > > OK, I've had a go at a few that cover some of the text-decoration cases that > > I've been looking at recently: http:///www.metahusky.net/~stewart/css/tests/ > > Am I doing it right? > > Looks pretty good. I'd suggest three things: > - use black text for the instructions, not green > - assert somewhere that there must be no red > - if you can think of a way to avoid obscuring the instructions with the > test lines in the fourth test, that would be good. :) I've inserted the instruction declaring the "no red" requirement line at the top of all the files. I assume that it would be wrong to insert it as a link element, as the guidelines indicate not to put the expected result information in the <link rel="assert"> elements. > "inheritance" isn't quite the right word here, because text-decoration > doesn't inherit in the CSS sense of the word. I'm not sure what to use > instead.. maybe text-decoration-descend, and e.g. "text-decoration should > not affect absolutely- or fixed-positioned descendants"? Yes, I wondered about the best wording to use because it's sort of like inheritance but not. I've changed them all, but obviously the title of the last test still mentions inheritance because that's exactly what it's testing. -- Stewart Brodie Software Engineer ANT Software Limited
Received on Monday, 14 January 2008 15:25:39 UTC