- From: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
- Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 19:32:20 -0400
- To: "Arron Eicholz" <arron.eicholz@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "Public CSS test suite mailing list" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Arron, [RC6] http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/xhtml1/absolute-replaced-width-004.xht [nightly-unstable] http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/xhtml1/absolute-replaced-width-004.xht [RC6] http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/xhtml1/absolute-replaced-width-011.xht [nightly-unstable] http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/xhtml1/absolute-replaced-width-011.xht For all practical purposes, I think those 2 tests are the same or achieve the same test. The only minor difference is that the containing block for the abs. pos. svg element is the initial containing block in absolute-replaced-width-004.xht and it is div#div2 in absolute-replaced-width-011.xht ... which does not do anything different anyway. The blue rectangle can not grow, will not grow in vertical space and in horizontal space if the svg element does not have an intrinsic height nor an intrinsic width; in both tests, it will resort to pre-defined fallback 300px for width and 150px for height. So the same rules apply: only calculations of the used right offset for the abs. pos. svg element will be different but this isn't the object/goal/purpose of the test to begin with. 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-contributions-css21-testsuite.html
Received on Friday, 7 September 2012 23:32:46 UTC