Re: c5504-mrgn-l-002 is invalid

On Thursday 2010-12-02 12:10 +1100, Alan Gresley wrote:
> On 2/12/2010 4:00 AM, L. David Baron wrote:
> >On Tuesday 2010-11-30 22:54 -0500, fantasai wrote:
> >>On 10/14/2010 03:05 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
> >>>http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101001/html4/c5504-mrgn-l-002.htm
> >>>http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101001/xhtml1/c5504-mrgn-l-002.xht
> 
> [snip]
> 
> >>The test is marked as 'should', and is therefore not required
> >>to pass. But I don't see any reason to remove it as it does
> >>not in fact appear to be invalid.
> >
> >If the point of the test is in fact to test that the horizontal
> >scrollbar allows scrolling to the left, the pass condition should
> >say that.  I suspect the implementations that are marked as passing
> >this test currently (although I can't actually find any) pass it
> >because they create a scrollbar that doesn't allow scrolling
> >anywhere.
> >
> >I think if the pass condition is corrected to test what you think
> >the test should be testing, we'll have 0 passes for the test.
> >
> >-David
> 
> Precisely David. No implementations that I can test with produce a
> scrollbar. If you can narrow the viewport to allow the text to wrap,
> the second line overflows towards the left but is partially hidden
> by the width of the negative margin. If the test did once produce a
> scrollbar in any implementations (guessing Gecko 1.7 or Opera 7 or
> other UA) then such implementations allowed (or allows) visible
> horizontal overflow in both directions.

I think some implementations (including some old Gecko versions)
produce a disabled scrollbar in this case.  That satisfies the pass
condition but not the intent of the test.

-David

-- 
L. David Baron                                 http://dbaron.org/
Mozilla Corporation                       http://www.mozilla.com/

Received on Thursday, 2 December 2010 01:22:40 UTC