- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 19:13:19 +0100
- To: "Chris Wilson" <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, "w3c-css-wg@w3.org" <w3c-css-wg@w3.org>, "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
- Cc: "Arron Eicholz" <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>
On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:26:05 +0100, Chris Wilson
<Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com> wrote:
> The test cases are published now at
> http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/csstestpages/default.htm.
Awesome guys!
I went quite quickly through these tests (mostly by checking which failed
in Opera 9.2x) and found some small issues:
http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/csstestpages/Chapter_14/background-position-041.htm
http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/csstestpages/Chapter_14/background-position-042.htm
http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/csstestpages/Chapter_14/background-position-045.htm
http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/csstestpages/Chapter_14/background-position-046.htm
are all invalid per CSS 2.1. The keyword needs to be on a specific side of
the length/percentage per CSS 2.1.
http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/csstestpages/Chapter_12/content-applies-to-001.htm
is valid per CSS 2.1 but CSS 3 allows this. It makes sense to not test
such things in CSS 2.1 to me. For instance, we wouldn't test
p::before { content: "FAIL" }
either because it's obvious that Selectors Level 3 endorses such a syntax.
Some tests have an unclear passing condition, but I haven't put references
down for those. In general these looks pretty good though.
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2008 18:13:49 UTC