- From: Arron Eicholz <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>
- Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2011 00:11:50 +0000
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, "Gérard Talbot" <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
- CC: "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
On Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:52 AM L. David Baron wrote > On Tuesday 2010-10-05 09:02 -0700, "Gérard Talbot" wrote: > > According to you then, > > > > http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101001/html4/z-index-001.htm > > > > and > > > > http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101001/html4/z-index-012.htm > > > > must also be considered invalid testcases because there is no range > > defined for z-index. > > They're not invalid because they're not testing that a value is rejected or > truncated. However, they're probably better off not in the suite because > they're testing values outside a "reasonable" > range. And their asserts are wrong. > > > Wouldn't it be best if CSS2.1 would define explicitly an allowed range > > for integer values for properties like counter-reset, > > counter-increment, z-index, widows, orphans, etc? For negative integer > > values when applicable. And also define explicitly what should happen > > when minimum > > (floor) and maximum (ceiling) values are exceeded? > > Maybe. > > Or it could define a range that *must* be handled but still allow handling of > values outside that range. Fixed for RC5. I didn't have to do much for the z-index cases. I changed the assert a little to be more general and confirmed that the tests assume a reasonable integer size and will still pass correctly if the value it truncated or goes beyond the max/min of a 32-bit integer. I also added the flag "32bit" to all cases to single these cases out a bit. -- Thanks, Arron Eicholz
Received on Saturday, 8 January 2011 00:12:24 UTC