- From: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
- Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2017 17:14:15 -0400
- To: Geoffrey Sneddon <me@gsnedders.com>
- Cc: W3C Public CSS Test suite mailing list <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Le 2017-04-03 15:08, Geoffrey Sneddon a écrit : > FWIW, this probably more lives in issues on the GitHub repository > (https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests) rather than in email, > because it'll likely get lost over time otherwise. Geoffrey, Then what should be the purpose of this mailing list? > > On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 9:13 PM, Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org> > wrote: >> Geoffrey, >> >> 1- >> Reference File >> "All metadata is removed." >> http://web-platform-tests.org/writing-tests/reftests.html#reference-file >> >> Actually, that is usually true but sometimes not true. If a reference >> file >> uses some flag(s), then a <meta name="flags" content=""> will be >> required. > > AFAIK, nothing has ever done anything with those flags. As far as I'm > aware, they've practically always been required to be on the test > itself. [snipped] We have discussed this before: " It's perfectly valid for a reference file to have flags, and they should be present as needed, but they should only reflect requirements of the reference (...) " Requirements flags in reference files https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2013Jun/0025.html >> 4- >> Ahem usage >> http://web-platform-tests.org/writing-tests/ahem.html#usage >> >> "as such, the font shorthand should normally be used." "doesn't use >> font >> shorthand;": font shorthand should not be recommended. I think it >> should be >> neutral: not encouraged, not discouraged. When I create a test that >> uses >> font shorthand, then I can not easily and quickly examine >> subproperties with >> web inspection tools. Also, font shorthand is more "sensitive", >> demanding: >> if only 1 subproperty is invalid, then the shorthand is rejected, >> ignored >> while declaring subproperties in individual declarations will only >> affect >> the invalid declarations and not the other valid subproperty >> declarations. > > The reason why the shorthand is recommended is it avoids any risk of > accidentally inheriting non-default property values, which would > likely result in Ahem not rendering as expected. [snipped] I have read several times your sentence and I do not understand it. The documentation even warns "Other font properties should make sure they have their default values". > As far as I'm aware, all web development tools provide ways to see > both defined and computed values; the latter should show the > individual properties. But not the former. > I don't think anyone should be using any font > value for Ahem that isn't valid CSS1, hence I don't think we should be > concerned about the shorthand being rejected. Shorthand form (not just for font) is more demanding than longhand form. >> 6- >> Be short >> http://web-platform-tests.org/writing-tests/general-guidelines.html#be-short >> " >> For reftests in particular scrollbars at 800×600px window size must be >> avoided unless scrolling behavior is specifically being tested. >> " >> This, I believe, was changed to 600px by 600px. Thread starts here: >> Reftest Maximum Viewport Size >> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2012Sep/0020.html >> >> Also: >> "the two files render pixel-for-pixel identically within a 600x600 >> window >> including scroll-bars if present;" >> http://web-platform-tests.org/writing-tests/reftests.html#components-of-a-reftest >> >> "The device has a viewport width of at least 800px." >> http://web-platform-tests.org/writing-tests/assumptions.html >> If pixel comparison involves only 600px, then why should we require a >> minimum of 800? >> >> I am wondering if the documentation is consistently coherent with >> regards to >> viewport width and presence of scrollbars. >> >> "The test renders within a 600x600 viewport, only displaying >> scrollbars if >> their presence is being tested. " >> http://web-platform-tests.org/reviewing-tests/checklist.html > > We have total disagreement about this, some documentation saying > 800x600, some saying 600x600, some implementations doing one, some the > other… It's a complete and utter mess. :\ > > This was a pre-existing issue with the old documentation for the CSS > testsuite (at testthewebforward.org), hence I didn't consider it a > priority to fix with the cleanup recently. This needs buy-in from > implementors, hence is more than a documentation issue, really. (For > reference, the old wiki documentation didn't define any resolution, or > even a minimum, so who knows how you were meant to run them.) [snipped] The 600px by 600px decision was (more or less) made in Reftest Maximum Viewport Size thread: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2012Sep/0024.html Gérard -- Writing Tests http://web-platform-tests.org/writing-tests/index.html General Test Guidelines http://web-platform-tests.org/writing-tests/general-guidelines.html Test Review Checklist http://web-platform-tests.org/reviewing-tests/checklist.html Test Templates http://web-platform-tests.org/appendix/test-templates.html Writing Reftests http://web-platform-tests.org/writing-tests/reftests.html
Received on Monday, 3 April 2017 21:14:51 UTC