- From: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
- Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 00:15:02 -0400
- To: "Linss, Peter" <peter.linss@hp.com>
- Cc: Chris Rebert <csswg@rebertia.com>, Public CSS Test suite mailing list <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>, chris@rebertia.com
Le 2015-08-17 19:15, Linss, Peter a écrit : > On Aug 17, 2015, at 1:59 PM, Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org> > wrote: > >> Le 2015-08-17 16:35, Chris Rebert a écrit : >>> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Chris Rebert <csswg@rebertia.com> >>> wrote: >>>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 9:06 PM, Gérard Talbot >>>> <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org> wrote: >>>>> Le 2015-07-27 03:21, Chris Rebert a écrit : >>>>>> Hi folks, >>>>>> I'm trying to get a reviewer for a CSS2 regression test: >>>>>> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-test/pull/813 >>>> <snip> >>>>> Your test is a good test. Indeed iPhone 6, Safari 7+ fail your >>>>> test. Here's >>>>> some review comments. >>> <snip> >>>>> 3- >>>>> <link rel="help" >>>>> href="https://drafts.csswg.org/css2/visuren.html#choose-position" >>>>> /> >>>>> <link rel="help" >>>>> href="https://drafts.csswg.org/css2/visudet.html#abs-non-replaced-width" >>>>> /> >>>>> <link rel="help" >>>>> href="https://drafts.csswg.org/css2/visudet.html#abs-non-replaced-height" >>>>> /> >>>>> Do not link to draft spec as they can change or will change in the >>>>> future. >>> When I inquired about adding an automatic validation check for this, >>> Peter Linss replied that there's actually no problem with using draft >>> spec links in rel="help". See >>> http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/testing/20150817#l-156 : >>> [22:09] <cvrebert> plinss: Gerard's feedback in >>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2015Aug/0003.html >>> (and the lack of corresponding complaints from the bot on >>> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-test/pull/813 ) suggests there's a >>> couple >>> things the bot ought to check that it currently isn't >>> [22:10] <cvrebert> plinss: (1) https://drafts.csswg.org shouldn't be >>> used in rel="help" links >>> [22:11] <plinss> actually, that’s not an issue, draft links are fine >> >> This is news to me. > > We have a large number of tests that only link to drafts, this is fine. > > There _is_ an issue however in that the canonical URLs for all the > drafts has recently changed from http://dev.w3.org/csswg/... to > https://drafts.csswg.org/... > > I need to run through the test repository and update those links as > they're currently broken. > >> >> If you link to a section of CSS2.2 and if there is no >> >> http://test.csswg.org/source/css22/ >> >> directory, then how is this going to work? > > If a test links to a spec that we are not yet building a test suite > for, there's no issue. We do still validate if the link is to a known > spec anchor or not. > > At some point in the future we will start building a test suite for > CSS 2.2 and then it will pick up all the tests that have links to the > 2.2 draft. > > Peter Okay then. Please ignore my previous email sent a few min. ago. Sorry about that. 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
Received on Tuesday, 18 August 2015 04:15:35 UTC