W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > April 2013

Re: [RC6] rgb(50%, ..., ...) or rgb(..., 50%, ...) or rgb(..., ..., 50%): fractional value!

From: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 16:19:12 -0400
Message-ID: <97804ddb614e3593dfbc377a00130b52.squirrel@ed-sh-cp3.entirelydigital.com>
To: "Rebecca Hauck" <rhauck@adobe.com>, "Arron Eicholz" <arron.eicholz@microsoft.com>
Cc: "Public CSS test suite mailing list" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>

Le Sam 23 février 2013 1:59, "Gérard Talbot" a écrit :
>
> Le Ven 22 février 2013 21:15, "Gérard Talbot" a écrit :
>>
>> Le Jeu 10 janvier 2013 15:25, Rebecca Hauck a écrit :
>>> Ok, I've cleared up the issues with all of these tests. They're
>>> batched
>>> in several checkins over the last few days: background-color[1],
>>> border-left-color[2], border-right-color[3], border-top-color[4],
>>> outline-color[5], color[6].
>>>
>>> For the background-color tests, I added a second reference file for
>>> 049,054,070,075,090,095,110,115. These all use either 1% or 99% rgb()
>>> values and now have pngs to match whether a UA rounds up or down.
>>> For
>>> the
>>> rest of the background-color tests in this batch
>>> (052-53,073-74,093-94,113-14), I changed 50% to 40% to eliminate the
>>> fractional colors.
>>
>>
>> http://test.csswg.org/source/approved/css2.1/src/backgrounds/background-color-049-020202-ref.xht
>>
>> http://test.csswg.org/source/approved/css2.1/src/backgrounds/background-color-049-030303-ref.xht
>>
>>    <meta name="flags" content="image" />
>>
>
> I can load the reftests and then, with an advanced text editor, remove
> all those <meta name="flags" content="image" /> lines.
>
>
>>
>> is not required, not needed in reftests.
>>
>> "
>> Unlike the format for the test file, there is no metadata except for
>> the
>> author credits and optional reference links.
>> "
>> http://wiki.csswg.org/test/reftest#the-reftest-reference-file
>>


Rebecca, Arron,

I removed
<meta name="flags" content="image" />
and
<meta name="flags" content="" />
in mentioned reftests (background-color ones and in color ones).



>> There is another - admittedly small - issue with the
>> background-color-nnn tests.
>>
>>         <div id="test"></div>
>>         <br/>
>>         <div id="reference">X</div>
>>
>> is not valid HTML. And in order to replace <br /> in the tests with a
>> margin-bottom set on div#test or margin-top set on div#reference, we
>> need to supply a defined, specified line-height value. 'line-height:
>> normal' can be computed anything from 1.0 to 1.2 but is often between
>> 1.10 and 1.20. A line box height of 19.2px can - theoretically
>> speaking
>> - be rounded up by some user agents too.
>>
>> I propose to drop, to remove <br /> in every background-color-nnn
>> tests
>> and in their related reftests) and just use a margin-top on the
>> div#reference of, say, 20px (or 1.25em).
>
> For consistency reasons, we should probably do what has been done in
> other tests: adding a margin-top on the div#reference of 10px.
>
> Eg.
> http://test.csswg.org/source/approved/css2.1/src/borders/border-left-color-049.xht
>
>             #reference
>             {
>                 background-color: rgb(1%, 1%, 1%);
>                 margin-top: 10px;
>             }
>
>
> This can be done with an advanced text editor in a few steps.
>
> And also do this on color-[002-145].xht tests.
>


I removed <br /> in all tests and reftests (background-color ones and
colors ones) and replaced <br /> with a vertical margin of 10px.


>>
>> I'm checking the other tests...
>>
>> I wanted to approve and add
>> <link rel="reviewer"
>> to all the tests and reftests.
>>


I have approved and reviewed all background-color-nnn.xht tests and
correspondent reftests (also those made by Rebecca).

I have uniformed the pass/fail conditions sentence everywhere: eg "box
below" has been replaced with "squares".

All the background-color and colors tests should now be using the same

"Test passes if there are 2 squares with the <strong>same color</strong>."

pass/fail conditions sentence.


>> Gérard
>>
>>>
>>> For tests 049,052-54,073-75,093-95,113-15 in the
>>> border-left/right/top/bottom-/outline-/color tests, I converted to
>>> reftests using background-color in the reference elements and ref
>>> files.
>
> Okay, I see.
>
>>>
>>> Lastly, I updated color-002-145 to remove the pngs from the reference
>>> elements to use background-color instead[7]. With the exception of
>>> those
>>> that I converted to reftests in this suite mentioned above, I kept
>>> ref
>>> files using pngs.
>>>
>>> One other notable change that I made to all of the files was based on
>>> a
>>> discovery from running these in mozilla's and webkit's automated
>>> harnesses. I changed the size of the font & img/div elements from 1in
>>> to
>>> 100px.


I also changed the size of the font & img/div elements from 1in to 100px
in the remaining tests (and associated reftests) which were still using
1in.


>>> Using 1in was causing some fuzzing around the edges and none
>>> of
>>> these tests were pixel perfect. Changing to 100px fixed the problem.
>>>
>>> I've removed the 'Needs Work' flag from all of these in Shepherd and
>>> these
>>> are all in either Resubmitted for Review or Accepted status.


Right now, the background-color and color tests and background-color and
color reftests in Resubmitted for Review status or in Waiting for Review
status should be in Accepted status.


>>>
>>>
>>> Please let me know if there are any issues with these changes.
>>>
>
> Just the meta-flag line in reftests and the <br> between 2 divs which
> could be better replaced with a margin-top: 10px on the appropriate
> elements (<div id="reference">).
>
> Gérard
>
>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Rebecca
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] http://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/e29cb8ff4c58
>>> [2] http://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/bd027b72439e
>>> [3] http://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/369ab0dae5bc
>>> [4] http://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/cbe4225d6c2d
>>> [5] http://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/77847b6a522d
>>> [6] http://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/5c61040b4f07
>>> [7] http://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/e37a9b6098ef
>>>


http://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/28aa91fb2c43

http://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/5b6f13a2ebba

http://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/4940652037ce


I will be checking again all those tests this week to make sure I did
not miss anything.

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 Monday, 8 April 2013 20:19:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:13:26 UTC