- From: Jakob Nilsson-Ehle <jnehle@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 18:03:42 +0100
- To: Kris Krueger <krisk@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "public-html-testsuite@w3.org" <public-html-testsuite@w3.org>
Sure, Just to be sure, this is the mailing list for the test suite that generates this report, right? http://test.w3.org/html/tests/reporting/report.htm At least that's where I found the email to begin with. Assuming that's true, my questions regard these specific test cases: canvas(toDataURL.jpeg.alpha.html ): http://test.w3.org/html/tests/approved/canvas/toDataURL.jpeg.alpha.html canvas(toDataURL.jpeg.quality.basic.html ): http://test.w3.org/html/tests/approved/canvas/toDataURL.jpeg.quality.basic.html canvas(toDataURL.jpeg.quality.notnumber.html ): http://test.w3.org/html/tests/approved/canvas/toDataURL.jpeg.quality.notnumber.html canvas(toDataURL.jpeg.quality.outsiderange.html ): http://test.w3.org/html/tests/approved/canvas/toDataURL.jpeg.quality.outsiderange.html All those tests will automatically pass if the returned data from toDataURL("image/jpeg") does not contain the mime type image/jpeg. That seems like very odd behaviour, since it is the explicit jpeg encoding that is being tested. So my question, once again, is, what is the reason for that? Wouldn't it make more sense to fail a browser if it doesn't do the jpeg encoding? Best regards, Jakob On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Kris Krueger <krisk@microsoft.com> wrote: > Can you provide more specifics for the 'test suite' and the specific test cases? > > -Thx > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-html-testsuite-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-testsuite-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jakob Nilsson-Ehle > Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2010 9:43 AM > To: public-html-testsuite@w3.org > Subject: JPEG Quality test > > Hi, > > I recently stumbled across the test suite while trying to solve a few problems I'm having with Chrome and Firefox toDataUrl implementation with image/jpeg encoding. > > In most of the tests regarding canvas jpeg encoding, the test will automatically pass if the browser doesn't support. If there a reason for this? Seems to me that it makes more sense to fail the browser on the jpeg specifics if it doesn't support jpeg and instead passing it on the toDataURL.unrecognized if it successfully falls back to png. > > Best regards, > Jakob > > > >
Received on Monday, 29 November 2010 17:04:36 UTC