W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-testsuite@w3.org > October 2010

RE: Canvas Test Submission approval/feedback request

From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 10:14:09 +0200 (CEST)
To: Kris Krueger <krisk@microsoft.com>
cc: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>, Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, "'public-html-testsuite@w3.org' (public-html-testsuite@w3.org)" <public-html-testsuite@w3.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1010061008420.16505@sirius>


On Wed, 6 Oct 2010, Kris Krueger wrote:

> Really glad to see all the participation and communication.
>
> As the appointed testing task force lead, james is correct according to our current charter from the co-chairs.
> That said this is a simple valuable use case for svg and canvas....
> This is also the reason Microsoft submitted this case to make it clear on how canvas should be built in an interoperable way.
> Note that safari, chrome and IE9 supports this today, so it's indeed possible to be implemented by more than one vendor.

After further discussions, I'm not sure my original position is tenable 
without causing undue inconvenience in writing testcases. Nevertheless 
where optional features exist we need some critera to determine whether we 
should include them in the official testsuite. A reasonable policy might 
be "features that all four major engines are committed to implementing are 
OK to test without a precondition check". It seems that SVG-in-img (and 
hence SVG-in-drawImage) meet this criterion (whereas, say, PDF-in-<img> 
would not). Therefore I no longer have a principled objection to the 
substance of this testcase.
Received on Wednesday, 6 October 2010 08:20:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 15:49:36 UTC