Re: The new tests for vertical align with vertical writing mode

Le 2015-08-09 01:21, 塩澤 元 a écrit :
> Gérard,
> 
> Thank you for reviewing!
> 
> I've modified tests.
> 
> - https://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/cf5a8ecf881f
> - https://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/490625ae662a
> - https://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/f5e3d25e9dae
> - https://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/31df568ea667
> 
> 
> Change Point
> - fixed border-size and font size based on your review.
> - added '6.3 Line-relative Directions' and '7.5 Line-Relative Mappings'
> which describe about physical-logical mapping as help tag.

This makes it 4 <link>ed specifications... which is a lot!

Please link to '7.5 Line-Relative Mappings' and to CSS2.1, section 
'10.8.1 Leading and half-leading'
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/REC-CSS2-20110607/visudet.html#leading
only.

Your tests are really just about how vertical-align: top | bottom | 
text-top | text-bottom are supposed to be rendered in vertical 
writing-modes. If your tests each have 4 links to spec, then each of 
your tests are copied in 4 places of test suite(s).


<link rel="help" title="4.4. Baseline Alignment" 
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/css-writing-modes-3/#baseline-alignment" />

would be good for vertical-align values of sub, super, <length>, and 
<percentage>. I would *not* include link to '4.4. Baseline Alignment' 
for testing vertical-align values of top, text-top, text-bottom, bottom.



> - changed assert description. (added the term 'line-over' and 
> 'line-under')
> - added a test for vertical-lr
> 
> 
> Hajime.
> 

In

http://test.csswg.org/source/css-writing-modes-3/vertical-alignment-new-008.xht

font: 3.75em/1.5 Ahem; /* computes to 60px/90px */

replaced with

font: 3.75em/3 Ahem; /* computes to 60px/180px */

so that tests are symetrical, mirror


I will check the other tests (the vertical-lr tests of your serie) later 
tomorrow... it's too late for me now.

Gérard



> 
> 2015-08-08 14:27 GMT+09:00 Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>:
> 
>> Le 2015-07-26 06:22, 塩澤 元 a écrit :
>> 
>>> Gérard,
>>> 
>>> I've submitted the new tests for 'vertical-align' property with 
>>> vertical
>>> writing-mode.
>>> https://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/8dd028e99e73
>>> Could you review it?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> First, I've created the four test-cases for the pattern which is not
>>> affected by its baseline.
>>> 
>>> writing-mode: (vertical-rl)
>>> x
>>> vertical-align: (top | text-top | text-bottom | bottom)
>>> => four pattern.
>>> 
>>> I think that in these test it is no need to test with variation of
>>> text-orientation because the calculation with 'top', 'text-top',
>>> 'text-bottom' and 'bottom' is not affected by baseline.
>>> 
>> 
>> Correct. It is not affected by what is the dominant baseline and where 
>> it
>> is. top and bottom and affected by the height of line box while 
>> text-bottom
>> and text-top are affected by top and bottom of parent's content area.
>> 
>> 
>> I will create test other properties which is affected by its baseline
>>> ('middle', 'sub', 'super', <percentage>, <length>) after the above 
>>> test
>>> case is approved.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hajime.
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> http://test.csswg.org/source/css-writing-modes-3/vertical-alignment-new-002.xht
>> 
>> <title>CSS Writing Modes Test: vertical align - 'baseline' 
>> (alphabetical
>> baseline with vertical layout)</title>
>> 
>> Proposed change:
>> 
>> <title>CSS Writing Modes Test: vertical-align - 'top' and vertical-rl
>> writing-mode</title>
>> 
>> 
>> Since the test does not require to check the dominant baseline 
>> (central
>> for 'text-orientation: mixed'), then you can safely use the same 
>> font-size
>> (1em) for the orange square.
>> 
>> I propose these changes to make the test a bit more easier to review:
>> 
>> <p>Test passes if the right edge of an orange square touches the left 
>> edge
>> of a blue square.</p>
>> 
>> div#rl {
>>     border-right: blue solid 2em;
>>     writing-mode: vertical-rl;
>>     font: 3.75em/3 Ahem; /* computes to 60px/180px */
>>     color: white;
>> }
>> 
>> span#orange30 {
>>     color: orange;
>>     vertical-align: top;
>>     line-height: 1;
>> }
>> 
>> In the reference file:
>> 
>> <p>Test passes if the right edge of an orange square touches the left 
>> edge
>> of a blue square.</p>
>> 
>>     img#orange
>>     {
>>       padding-top: 60px; /* = the height of first character */
>>       padding-left: 120px; /* = the position of orange square */
>>     }
>> 
>> <div>
>>    <img id="orange" src="support/swatch-orange.png" width="60" 
>> height="60"
>> alt="Image download support must be enabled" /><img
>> src="support/swatch-blue.png" width="120" height="120" alt="Image 
>> download
>> support must be enabled" />
>> </div>
>> 
>> 
>> http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/CSS3WritingModes/vertical-alignment-new-002-Hajime-1.xht
>> 
>> 
>> In such version of your test, you could even remove 'color: white' so 
>> that
>> we would be able to figure out the physical width (logical height) of 
>> the
>> line box. When I set to 3, I know in advance that the top-half-leading 
>> (and
>> bottom-half-leading) outside content area is going to be the size of 
>> the
>> font, unless an inline element (say, a big image) increases the line 
>> box
>> height.
>> 
>> 
>> More simple version of that test:
>> 
>> http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/CSS3WritingModes/vertical-alignment-new-002-Hajime-2.xht
>> 
>> Chrome 46 fails both versions of that test.
>> IE11 passes both version of that test but it does not shrink the 
>> height of
>> the div.
>> I don't know about Microsoft Edge.
>> 
>> - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> 
>> 
>> http://test.csswg.org/source/css-writing-modes-3/vertical-alignment-new-004.xht
>> 
>> <title>CSS Writing Modes Test: vertical align - 'baseline' 
>> (alphabetical
>> baseline with vertical layout)</title>
>> 
>> Proposed change:
>> 
>> <title>CSS Writing Modes Test: vertical-align - 'text-top' and 
>> vertical-rl
>> writing-mode</title>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> <meta name="assert" content="This test checks the position of inline 
>> box
>> with vertical align property. When 'writing-mode' is 'vertical-rl',
>> 'vertical-align' is 'text-top', the right edge of inline-box aligned 
>> with
>> the top of parent inline-box." />
>> 
>> It is not exactly this ... but I know it's difficult to word all this.
>> 
>> I suggest:
>> 
>> "
>> (...) When 'writing-mode' is 'vertical-rl', 'vertical-align' is
>> 'text-top', the physical right (logical top) edge of an inline 
>> non-replaced
>> box is aligned with the right side (logical top) of parent's content 
>> area.
>> "
>> 
>> The physical width (logical height) of inline non-replaced box is set 
>> with
>> 'line-height'. When you set it to 1, you shrink such box to its 
>> content
>> area: there is no top-half-leading outside the glyph and there is no
>> bottom-half-leading below the glyph. So, that's why the orange edge is
>> straight and unbroken.
>> 
>> There is no way to paint the top-half-leading and bottom-half-leading 
>> of
>> an inline non-replaced box; otherwise we would not have to set its
>> line-height to 1.
>> 
>> Your test, as is, is correct and is doing what you want to test.
>> 
>> Gérard
>> --
>> Test Format Guidelines
>> http://testthewebforward.org/docs/test-format-guidelines.html
>> 
>> Test Style Guidelines
>> http://testthewebforward.org/docs/test-style-guidelines.html
>> 
>> Test Templates
>> http://testthewebforward.org/docs/test-templates.html
>> 
>> CSS Naming Guidelines
>> http://testthewebforward.org/docs/css-naming.html
>> 
>> Test Review Checklist
>> http://testthewebforward.org/docs/review-checklist.html
>> 
>> CSS Metadata
>> http://testthewebforward.org/docs/css-metadata.html
>> 

-- 
Test Format Guidelines
http://testthewebforward.org/docs/test-format-guidelines.html

Test Style Guidelines
http://testthewebforward.org/docs/test-style-guidelines.html

Test Templates
http://testthewebforward.org/docs/test-templates.html

CSS Naming Guidelines
http://testthewebforward.org/docs/css-naming.html

Test Review Checklist
http://testthewebforward.org/docs/review-checklist.html

CSS Metadata
http://testthewebforward.org/docs/css-metadata.html

Received on Sunday, 9 August 2015 08:38:59 UTC