- From: Eira Monstad <eiram@opera.com>
- Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 21:23:08 +0200
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: public-css-testsuite@w3.org
On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 11:59:57 +0200, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > Eira Monstad wrote: >> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:26:24 +0200, fantasai >> <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: >> >>> Eira Monstad wrote: >>>> Cheers, >>>> I've been working on some bidi related tests for the 2.1 testsuite, >>>> as well as converting a few of Richard Ishida's tests for language >>>> dependent styling to match the testsuite template. The tests are >>>> ready for review at http://people.opera.com/eiram/test/css21/review/ >>> >>> http://people.opera.com/eiram/test/css21/review/bidi-display-block-001.xht >>> So the assertion here is >>> "An inline with display:block should be treated as a paragraph >>> in the bidi algorithm" >>> >>> How would the test fail? You'd get the same result if the <span>s >>> were still inline and the text wrap point happened to fall in >>> between, no? >> Yes, you should. >> This test isn't any different, logically, from checking that a bidi >> paragraph boundary is applied on <br>. > > Right. > >> Opera had bugs on this back when bidi was first implemented, so it's >> a good thing to check even though it seems obvious that the two lines >> would be the same. >> I've modified the test a bit to make it a tad more complex, could >> potentially catch a bug or two that the previous version didn't. The >> logic of the test it the same though. > > Looks like it would catch more bugs, but I'm still having a hard time > understanding how this test would fail if the UA did not place a bidi > paragraph boundary between the two spans. To test that, you'd need to > place a neutral character at the boundary and put a character on the > other side that would cause the neutral character to change position > if the boundary wasn't there. The test in its current incarnation will, if the paragraph boundary is not present, end up as "eng AR (eng eng ( AR (eng (1". That is quite different from the correct rendering with boundary, which is "eng AR (eng (1" twice. So the test should be fine. > E.g. using the ltr RTL convention, logical order in the source, and > ltr paragraph direction: > > <span>CBA def IHG!</span> > <span>CBA def IHG!</span> > > which should display as > ABC def GHI! > ABC def GHI! > but if the 'display: block;' wasn't there would display as (if I'm doing > this correctly) > ABC def ABC !GHI def GHI! > and if the 'display: block;' was there but bidi boundary wasn't there > would display as > ABC def !GHI > ABC def GHI! > (because the exclamation mark gets RTL directionality from being > surrounded by RTL characters instead of LTR directionality from being > bounded on one end by RTL and on the other end by the LTR paragraph > boundary). This won't work. As I'm on vacation right now (I just stumbled over my mail as I was going to shut the machine down before leaving) I'll leave the why as an exercise to the reader ;) -- Eira Monstad CoreQA Furthermore, it is my opinion that BTS2 must be destroyed
Received on Saturday, 19 July 2008 19:24:34 UTC