Re: Browser detection for shepherd/css test runner

Another ping on this... anyone have thoughts at least?!


On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 4:47 PM, Christian Biesinger <>

> So, Webkit and Blink are diverging more and more. Could we update the
> icons on and probably elsewhere
> to separate out Blink from Webkit? For the purpose of CR exit, humans
> can always make the judgement on whether they should count as
> different implementations for that purpose.
> -Christian
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Linss, Peter <> wrote:
> >
> > On Mar 31, 2015, at 2:43 PM, Christian Biesinger <>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 9:45 PM, Peter Linss <>
> wrote:
> >>> The problem is, while there’s divergence in some areas, there’s still
> shared code in many (most?), and it currently requires human judgement to
> determine if passes form both count as two independent implementations or
> not.
> >>
> >> Yes of course. I guess what you are implying is that the intent of
> >> these boxes is to see at a glance whether there's enough
> >> implementations to go from CR to REC...?
> >
> > Correct, that was the primary purpose of the test harness. You'll notice
> after the table counts of how many passes are required to reach CR exit
> criteria.
> >
> >>
> >> To me, it was more useful to see how various browsers do, and in some
> >> cases (Flexbox, Grid, probably other more recent CSS specs) the
> >> implementations do diverge and may easily pass different tests;
> >> whether or not they should count as independent implementations is a
> >> different issue.
> >
> > Understood, one a spec exit's CR, the focus of the test suite does
> switch to conformance testing. At some point I can take a look at
> augmenting the system to display WebKit and Blink in different columns, but
> count them as one implementation. Ideally I'd like a mechanism to know
> where they should be considered the same vs independent...
> >
> >>
> >>> If someone wants to generate a map (keyed by spec section) where
> there’s divergence (or the converse would be better, since that set isn’t
> getting bigger), I’d be happy to have the test harness automatically
> differentiate the results.
> >>>
> >>> For the record, each result is keyed to the full UA string that
> generated it, so we can always go back and re-assign results to different
> products.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> As for Presto, it is certainly of quickly declining relevance, but
> there are still a few areas where it supports features not supported in
> other browsers, or conforms better than other browsers. I think we should
> keep it for a while longer. As it provides useful information to the people
> working on the spec or the tests.
> >>>>
> >>>> Besides, there's nothing wrong with a little tongue-in-cheek
> challenge to other browsers ("Even old Presto gets this right!”).
> >>>
> >>> No reason to remove old passing implementations… I’ll take passes from
> Lynx if it helps get a spec to CR.
> >>
> >> Fair enough. Is the UA detection good enough to not treat current
> >> Opera as Presto?
> >
> > Yes, it goes by UA string. Opera's current UA string only mentions
> WebKit so that's what it's counted as. When we treat WebKit and Blink
> differently I can add some special case code to consider that Blink (though
> it would be best if the Opera US string actually listed Blink, for matter
> if Chrome would too...)

Received on Friday, 8 July 2016 21:59:50 UTC