Re: [css-writing-modes-3] Additional review of vertical-alignment-new-00? tests

Gérard,

Thank you for the detailed explanation.
I have learned CSS knowledge a lot from you!

I have changed the assert description and line-height comment.
https://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/828918d30919

> Another thing is that the test, for practical purposes, uses an inline
box that has no top-half-leading outside its content area (by setting on
purpose, deliberately, the span#orange's line-height to 1, that is what the
test does) so that the orange squares all line up vertically at one side.
> The test would be tougher for browsers and for the test author (but
doable) if the span#orange's line-height was inherited.
OK, I see.
I'm considering about the way to test when span#orange's line-height was
inherited (not setting line-height to 1).
I don't have accurate understanding about line-height. Now I'm studying
about it reading the spec.

Hajime.




2015-08-13 6:15 GMT+09:00 Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>:

> Hajime,
>
> vertical-align - 'text-bottom' and vertical-rl writing-mode
>
> http://test.csswg.org/source/css-writing-modes-3/vertical-alignment-new-006.xht
>
> <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-bottom', the physical left (logical bottom,
> namely 'line-under') edge of an inline non-replaced box is aligned with the
> left side (logical bottom, namely 'line-under') of parent's content area."
> />
>
> I propose these minor changes:
>
> <meta name="assert" content="This test checks the position of an inline
> non-replaced box with vertical align property. When 'writing-mode' is
> 'vertical-rl', 'vertical-align' is 'text-bottom', the physical left
> (logical bottom) edge of an inline non-replaced box is aligned with the
> left side (logical bottom) of parent's content area." />
>
> Why these changes? An inline box does not have a line-under side; the line
> box has a line-under side. Line-under should be used for identifying one
> line box side only. If there was an *inline-under* concept, then that would
> be good usage. Also, the parent's content area is not the inline box and is
> not the line box; so it is not a good usage either. The verb "is aligned
> with" or "is flush with" (which is used by CSS2.1, section 9.5) does not go
> well with the "side" noun you are using.
>
> Same thing with
> vertical-align - 'text-bottom' and vertical-lr writing-mode
>
> http://test.csswg.org/source/css-writing-modes-3/vertical-alignment-new-007.xht
>
>
> Another thing is that the test, for practical purposes, uses an inline box
> that has no top-half-leading outside its content area (by setting on
> purpose, deliberately, the span#orange's line-height to 1, that is what the
> test does) so that the orange squares all line up vertically at one side.
> The test would be tougher for browsers and for the test author (but doable)
> if the span#orange's line-height was inherited.
>
> - - - - - - - - -
>
> vertical-align - 'bottom' and vertical-rl writing-mode
>
> http://test.csswg.org/source/css-writing-modes-3/vertical-alignment-new-008.xht
>
> line 16: font: 3.75em/3 Ahem; /* computes to 60px/90px */
>
> should be
>
> font: 3.75em/3 Ahem; /* computes to 60px/180px */
>
> <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 'bottom', the physical left (logical bottom, namely
> 'line-under') edge of inline-box attaches the physical left (logical
> bottom, namely 'line-under') of line-box." />
>
> I propose these minor changes:
>
> <meta name="assert" content="This test checks the position of inline
> non-replaced box with vertical align property. When 'writing-mode' is
> 'vertical-rl', 'vertical-align' is 'bottom', the physical left (logical
> bottom) edge of an inline non-replaced box is aligned with the physical
> left (logical bottom) edge of its line box." />
>
> - - - - - - - - -
>
> vertical-align - 'bottom' and vertical-lr writing-mode
>
> http://test.csswg.org/source/css-writing-modes-3/vertical-alignment-new-009.xht
>
> font: 3.75em/3 Ahem; /* computes to 60px/90px */
>
> should be
>
> font: 3.75em/3 Ahem; /* computes to 60px/180px */
>
> - - - - - - -
>
> vertical-align - 'text-top' and vertical-lr writing-mode
>
> http://test.csswg.org/source/css-writing-modes-3/vertical-alignment-new-005.xht
>
> An inline non-replaced box does not have a line-over edge. It's not a
> best, appropriate usage of line-over edge. 'line-over', 'line-under',
> 'line-left', 'line-right' are just logical terms for identifying each or
> which sides of a line box we're referring to.
>
> - - - - - - -
>
> Overall, do not use "line-box" and "inline-box"; use "line box" and
> "inline box".
>
> The CSS2.1 uses this kind of wording (verb) when comparing position of 2
> edges:
>
> An edge is [ below | above | flush with | aligned with | on the left of |
> on the right of ] another edge.
>
> 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
>



-- 
# 塩澤 元 (Shiozawa, Hajime)
# mail: hajime.shiozawa@gmail.com