- From: Rebecca Hauck <rhauck@adobe.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 09:44:54 -0800
- To: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
- CC: Arron Eicholz <arron.eicholz@microsoft.com>, Public CSS test suite mailing list <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
On 12/7/12 2:29 PM, "Gérard Talbot" <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org> wrote: > >Le Ven 7 décembre 2012 15:55, Rebecca Hauck a écrit : >> >>> >>>If we were face-to-face or on the phone, it would be interesting to >>>discuss this. I don't necessarly disagree with you on everything. >>> >> > >I should have been saying "I don't necessarly disagree with what you >said in the above paragraph." rather. > >Arron said something in a paragraph which I thought could lead to a >rhetorical discussion or theoretical/academical discussion. >And we have lots of tests to update and review. > > >> Hi Gérard, >> >> We are planning on having another call to discuss the CSS21 test suite >> after the CSSWG call next Wednesday, December 12. Would you like to join >> us to discuss this? As I mentioned, this affects a large number of tests >> we want to clean up for the release, so it's very worthwhile to get a >> resolution soon. >> >> Thanks, >> -Rebecca > >Rebecca, > >As far as I am concerned, we can do 3 (I'm happy with such option) for >cases with rgb(1%) and rgb(99%) as I said in > >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2012Dec/0012.html > >which is: > >" >3. Update the background-color cases to have 2 references one ref that >is on either side of the value being defined. >" > >I think we only need to tune the following 8 tests (so that they have 2 >references on either side) by doing 3.: > >http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-colo >r-049.htm > >http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-colo >r-054.htm > >http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-colo >r-070.htm > >http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-colo >r-075.htm > >http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-colo >r-090.htm > >http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-colo >r-095.htm > >http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-colo >r-110.htm > >http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/background-colo >r-115.htm Ok, great! We'll go with #3 for this set of tests. May I change the status of the others back to Approved or do you prefer to do it? It appears I have permission to that. > >What I miss from the beginning is the pivoting transitivity between >*-color tests which was, it seems, an intentional, deliberate testing >design decision. > >Phone calls are usually not favorable to me. First, there is lag. There >can be echo in the background. I may miss a few words which then makes >understanding sentences difficult. Or some words are unknown to me: eg. >"divvy up", "piece meal". All this slows the discussion, the group and >me. So, I prefer not to slow down conference phone calls. > >Gérard >-- >Contributions to the CSS 2.1 test suite: >http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/ > >CSS 2.1 Test suite RC6, March 23rd 2011: >http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/toc.html > >CSS 2.1 test suite harness: >http://test.csswg.org/harness/ > >Contributing to to CSS 2.1 test suite: >http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/web-authors-contr >ibutions-css21-testsuite.html >
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2012 17:44:51 UTC