- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:14:54 -0700
- To: Bruno Fassino <fassino@gmail.com>
- CC: public-css-testsuite@w3.org
On 02/27/2010 11:49 PM, Bruno Fassino wrote: > http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/microsoft/submitted/Chapter_16/white-space-processing-006.xht > says: > "Test passes if the black box below is the same width, or shorter, > than the blue box" > and the assertion is: > "A carriage return before a linefeed is removed...." > > It's not clear how the width of the blue and black boxes can prove the > assertion. If the carriage return would not be removed I doubt the > effect would be in the width of the above boxes. > Am I missing something? > Similar comments apply to other white-space-processing-nnn tests. The test is overall incorrect, because the white space at the end of #div1 gets removed by step 3 in part II of the white-space processing rules. There needs to be another character before the end of the <div> to make sure we're testing Part I and not Part II of the algorithm. Also since we're looking at white space, and white space is not visible without a background, the width of the character sequence is not visible for comparison here. Once there's a character after the white space sequence, it's possible to tell if the CR was removed because if it wasn't, you'd either get a line break or an extra space representing the CR. You'd probably want to use a <span> instead of a <div>, though, to let the white space show up; and give it a background that matches the text color to avoid distracting the tester by the makeup of the box. Also, changing the reference to use Xes and to match the expected output could make the Ahem font helpful but unnecessary, which would be nice. ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 18 March 2010 01:24:31 UTC