- From: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
- Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 16:53:43 -0400
- To: "Řyvind Stenhaug" <oyvinds@opera.com>
- Cc: "Public CSS test suite mailing list" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Le Lun 10 septembre 2012 5:34, Řyvind Stenhaug a écrit : > On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 03:20:24 +0200, GĂ©rard Talbot > <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org> wrote: > >> [RC6] >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/abspos-010.htm >> >> [nightly-unstable] >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/abspos-010.htm >> >> If you examine this test with various browsers, you'll notice a >> difference of rendering (height of green area): >> >> Opera 12.02, Chrome 21.0.1180.89, Safari 5.1.7, Konqueror 4.9.0 all >> render a 48px wide by 48px tall green square. >> >> Firefox 15.0 and IE8 render a 48px wide by 64px tall green rectangle. >> >> The difference is due to how vertical margins are supposed to be >> rendered: the 2em margin-top of the abs. pos. table (.fixed) should >> *not* collapse with margin-bottom of <p>. So, Firefox 15.0 and IE8 are >> correct. > > I disagree with this part. The ".fixed" table is absolutely positioned > and > has top:auto, so > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#abs-non-replaced-height says the > vertical position should be determined as if position had been static > (and > float:none; clear:none). In that case the margins *would* collapse. > > Of course, the part "user agents are free to make a guess at its > probable > position" means Firefox and IE can't be said to be violating the spec > either... > >> So, I revisited >> >> [RC6] >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/margin-collapse-012.htm >> >> [nightly-unstable] >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/margin-collapse-012.htm >> >> and noticed that a few more tests could be submitted to better cover >> possibilities: >> >> With margin-bottom: >> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/gtalbot/submitted/margin-collapse-012a.xht >> >> With a collapsed-through element: >> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/gtalbot/submitted/margin-collapse-012b.xht >> >> With with margin-top (with an abs. pos. table): >> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/gtalbot/submitted/margin-collapse-012c.xht >> >> With margin-bottom (with an abs. pos. table): >> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/gtalbot/submitted/margin-collapse-012d.xht >> >> With a collapsed-through element (with an abs. pos. table): >> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/gtalbot/submitted/margin-collapse-012e.xht > > I haven't examined all these in detail, but I think they are wrong > because > of the above. Řyvind, I have removed all those 5 contributors/gtalbot/submitted/margin-collapse-012a-e tests committed changeset 4212:30cf0f17a5b1 I agree with you. I think [nightly-unstable] http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/margin-collapse-012.htm should be removed or redesigned with a "may" flag added. I'll add a comment in Shepherd regarding margin-collapse-012 test to that effect. 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 Tuesday, 11 September 2012 20:54:09 UTC