- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 20:17:50 +0000
- To: public-svg-issues@w3.org
The Working Group just discussed `implementation review`. <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <krit> topic: implementation review<br> <AmeliaBR> Github: https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/487<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: tried to get some structure with linking to tests in SVG 1.1<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: some changes in SVG 2 are editorial and don't require test updates. I tried to create issues for tests on every item to the list.<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: if ppl add more tests that need more discussions, go back to the GitHub issue 487 and update the section in question with your question.<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: Please add new information as a comment and never edit existing comments otherwise ppl wouldn't get noticed. But if status changes on a section, edit the initial comment on each GitHub section issue.<br> <krit> krit: Could you please update the README so that we have a link to 487?<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: would be good to have a link so that it doesn't get lost.<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: some specific issues I discovered: A number of tests for data types. Didn't get to going through the list if they have been updated. Someone should review them. More generic issue: How do we keep track of which paragraph/section line up to specific tests. Tests should have links to the section/paragraph in the spec but that depends on the granularity of links in SVG2.<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: Bikeshed added reverse linking from tests to the spec but we do not have this generic way.<br> <krit> Tavmjong: how does CSS do it?<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: they use Bikeshed to generate the specs.<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: we have our own build system.<br> <krit> Tavmjong: would be great to have this back linking<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: would be great to have links to tests in the spec right to the repository.<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: automated tests results don't happen for manual tests.<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: we should come up with some metrics to see what we have tests for.<br> <krit> krit: with the current build system... should we manually add links to the tests?<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: yes.<br> <krit> krit: are those links commented out or hidden from the spec?<br> <Tavmjong> https://www.w3.org/TR/css-fonts-3/#font-style-matching<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: we could do something with a whole list of tests per section... I'd rather make more efforts to break down the tests paragraph by paragraph<br> <krit> Tavmjong: Do you plan something like in CSS Fonts.<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: not as detailed as CSS does it.<br> <krit> liam: CSS has complex tools to do that including Bikeshed.<br> <krit> krit: was more thinking of something simple as adding <!--- comments to the spec text itself for now.<br> <krit> Tavmjong: could you do an example for next week?<br> <AmeliaBR> Example. Circles should be round (<a href="https://wpt.fyi/results/svg/shapes/...>Test</a>)<br> <liam> s/complex tools/tools (that require different markup in the spec)/<br> <AmeliaBR> Real result page: https://wpt.fyi/results/svg/painting/reftests/paint-context-001.svg<br> <krit> krit: would be easier to see a PR and we'd follow its lead.<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: sounds good<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: we should resolve when we have specific examples.<br> <AmeliaBR> https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/506<br> <krit> krit: so we take it up next week?<br> <liam> +1 to spec linking back to tests (or to metadata in tests linking back, and a tool to connect them)<br> <krit> krit: I'd be in favour for those back links. Makes it easier to prove that we have tests in place for each section.<br> <krit> krit: are there more tests on SVG beside DOM APIs?<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: browser implementers do upload SVG tests for specific scenarios but no basic testing. Beside the tests for SVG 1.1 and the PNG manual pixel testing.<br> <krit> Tavmjong: this is not a priority for us.<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: Right, we focus on the changes from sVG 1.1 to SVG 2.0<br> <krit> krit: any advice on creating the section specific implementation support?<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: was going through the changes section. However, we had a lot of reorganisation of the spec. So changes might not only be in the section one would expect them to be. Make sure to find all the changes.<br> <krit> Tavmjong: one thing about webplatofrm tests: they don't show the reference. So you don't see how and why they fail.<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: yes. Either they pass or fail<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: it is mostly optimized for automised tests<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: there are 2 types: script focused tests and ref tests.<br> <krit> krit: both are intended to run in the console for every browser.<br> <krit> AmeliaBR: that is true.<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/487#issuecomment-405368121 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 16 July 2018 20:17:53 UTC