Re: CSS 2.1 @charset tests invalidated by Level 3

On Wed, 11 Feb 2015 19:35:32 +0400, Arron Eicholz <arronei@microsoft.com>  
wrote:

> On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 1:00 AM Simon Pieters  
> [mailto:simonp@opera.com] wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 14:27:01 +0400,  wrote:
>>
>> > On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote:
>> >> CSS Syntax Level 3 invalidates some @charset tests in the CSS 2.1
>> >> test suite. It’s not good for anyone when people think that a Level 3
>> >> implementation is buggy when it correctly implements Level 3 but the
>> >> Level 2.1 test suite shows red. Therefore, please rescind the
>> >> following tests per
>> >> http://w3cmemes.tumblr.com/post/31865121758/the-joker-shares-his-
>> appr
>> >> oach-on-css2-1-issues
>> >>
>> >> Tests that are invalid per Level 3 but still pass (i.e. green for a
>> >> different reason than the reason why they are supposed to be green):
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/at-charset-001.htm
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/at-charset-044.htm
>>
>> Fixed the tests.
>
> You created new tests for CSS-syntax. Please move these tests there  
> (CSS-Syntax) and revert your changes to CSS 2.1. Those CSS 2.1 tests  
> were correct for 2.1. And will remain correct unless we do some major  
> reworking of the spec in errata which I seriously doubt.

We decided in Sydney to errata 2.1 and fix the tests for this issue. Peter  
Linss suggested that I just fix the tests in place, so that's what I did.  
The errata is not done yet, though. I think character encoding detection  
can be fixed without major reworking on the spec since it's a  
preprocessing step.

Does your request to move/revert stand with that in mind? Or do you  
disagree with 2.1 errata for this?

> It may be a good idea to put a note in the CSS 2.1 test cases that they  
> have be superseded by new tests. Maybe even link to the new tests.
>
> <p>Note: This test has been superseded by definitions from a newer level  
> of CSS (<a href="">at-charset-0xx</a>).</p>
>
> Think of it this way... As an implementer I am not required to implement  
> in any particular order. I can go ahead and implement CSS 2.1 first and  
> then at some later date implement CSS-Syntax. The test suites should  
> remain independent for that reason. The only order I have to follow is  
> newer levels of specs override older but I am not required to implement  
> the latest and greatest right from the start.

Sure. But you still want the latest 2.1.

>> >> Tests invalidated by Level 3:
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/at-charset-029.htm
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/at-charset-030.htm
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/at-charset-042.htm
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/at-charset-043.htm
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/at-charset-045.htm
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/at-charset-046.htm
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/at-charset-047.htm
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/at-charset-048.htm
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/at-charset-060.htm
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/at-charset-utf16-b
>> >> e-001.htm
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/at-charset-utf16-l
>> >> e-001.htm
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/character-encoding
>> >> -017.htm
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/character-encoding
>> >> -018.htm
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/character-encoding
>> >> -028.htm
>>
>> Fixed the tests.
> Please move, revert and provide a note.
>
>> Please see https://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/3a54ecf96edb and let me know  
>> if I
>> got something wrong.
>>
>> >> The reasons why the above are now invalid:
>> >>  1) BOM now overrides HTTP
>> >>  2) BOM now overrides @charset
>> >>  3) Non-ASCII @charset no longer gets honored
>> >>  4) Bogus charset names now cause @charset to be ignored, not the
>> >> sheet to be discarded.
>> >>
>> >> Tests whose validity was questionable to begin with:
>> >> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/at-charset-013.htm
>>
>> Would you like this test to be removed? Or annotated as "MAY"? Something
>> else? (We didn't discuss this test in particular at the f2f.)
>
> Annotated would be good. I am thinking we might want to add a flag to  
> the test case (replaced??). Though I am not sure what yet. For now  
> provide a note:
>
> <p>Note: This test has been superseded by definitions from a newer level  
> of CSS (<a href="">at-charset-0xx</a>).</p>

I don't think this one has changed in css-syntax -- you still use the  
document's encoding if there's no other encoding information, and what the  
document's encoding is is not up to CSS.

> You should also correct the help link to point to CSS-Syntax these new  
> tests aren't part of CSS 2.1.
>
>> >
>> > It looks like these tests are still the latest. What should my
>> > expectations be regarding getting CSS 2.1 tests rescinded when they
>> > are invalidated by newer levels?
>>
>
> The test are valid tests still for CSS 2.1. Though they may have been  
> superseded by CSS-Syntax doesn't make them any less valid for CSS 2.1.  
> The tests need a note in them stating that they are superseded.
>
> On a brighter note the tests seem perfectly ok for CSS-Syntax I will  
> have no problem approving them once they are tweaked per my notes above.

Great, thanks for reviewing.

-- 
Simon Pieters
Opera Software

Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2015 17:48:51 UTC