Re: Consolidating css-wg and web-platform-tests repositories (Was: test suite meta data)

On 2013-08-06 11:39, Peter Linss wrote:
> On Aug 6, 2013, at 11:14 AM, James Graham wrote:

>> Where does the requirement to have the full suite in multiple formats 
>> come from? It seems unlikely that the CSS layer in browsers would 
>> depend on the parser that was originally used. Do you have examples of 
>> tests that found bugs when run in XML but not in HTML?
>> 
> 
> It's not so much to test a browser's behavior in both input formats,
> but to make the suite available for clients that don't support one
> format or the other. Clients which we needed to exit CR for CSS2.1 and
> will likely need again for other specs. For example, some of the
> implementations are offline XHTML to PDF converters or XHTML-Print
> renderers embedded in printers. This is particularly true for
> paged-media CSS features that are generally poorly supported in
> browsers (but I'd be more than happy if we could rely on browsers to
> pass those tests).

So essentially all this complexity is to support non-web use cases? 
That seems unfortunate.

Received on Tuesday, 6 August 2013 19:40:30 UTC