- 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