W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > March 2010

Re: may and HTMLonly flags; max-width-109.htm test; SGML comments

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 18:00:37 -0700
Message-ID: <4BA2CCB5.7050603@inkedblade.net>
To: css21testsuite@gtalbot.org
CC: "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>, Bruno Fassino <fassino@gmail.com>, James Hopkins <james@idreamincode.co.uk>
On 02/09/2010 07:38 AM, Gérard Talbot wrote:
> Hello all,
> 1- may and HTMLonly flags
> -------------------------
> The last time I checked the CSS 2.1 test suite, the flags "may" and
> "HTMLonly" were not displayed (not viewable, not visible) in the flags
> column in the index pages.

The new build process uses the HTMLonly and nonHTML flags to exclude
tests from inappropriate build formats. So, nonHTML tests won't be
converted to HTML, and HTMLonly tests won't appear in the XHTML versions.

Just checked in fixes for handling "may" and "should". Thanks for the

> 2- max-width-109.htm test
> -------------------------
> James and Fantasai,
> This testcase
> http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/20100127/html4/max-width-109.htm
> has a duplicated
> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=UTF-8">
> and the image link is not relative to the support folder.
> Actual:
> src="http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/current/xhtml1/support/swatch-blue.png"
> Expected: src="support/swatch-blue.png"

I've reorganized James' tests to match the approved/ directory,
and copied over all the test suite's support files so that they're
available there. I've also fixed the test to use a relative URL.

> 3- SGML comments
> ----------------
> I would like to know
> - if SGML comments are possible and acceptable in a testcase
> - otherwise, if SGML comments are stripped, then is it ok to explain a
> bit what is happening in the testcase in the test assertion?
> I ask this because some particular testcases covering float, clear,
> clearance and margin collapsing are more difficult to do, more complex
> to do+understand and involve more intricated explanations from the CSS
> 2.1 spec. (section 8.3.1 and 9.5.2 in particular)
> I ask this because Bruno Fassino submitted excellent testcases and his
> annotations in the form of SGML comments would help..

SGML comments should now be preserved across conversion under the
new build system. :)

Received on Friday, 19 March 2010 18:49:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 20 January 2023 19:58:14 UTC