- From: Eric A. Meyer <emeyer@sr71.lit.cwru.edu>
- Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 11:47:54 -0500
- To: www-style@w3.org
At 17:32 +0100 11/22/1999, Daniel Glazman wrote a whole lot of stuff, part
of which went something like this:
>5.4 Type selectors
> On my browser, all the document is sans-serif so it is
> difficult to check if the first rule on H1 is applied
> I run NS4.7 on Sparc+X
Oops! I forgot to add a 'font-family' to the basic stylesheet for all
pages. This has been corrected.
>5.5 Descendant selectors
> Typo in the title : DescEndant
> I suggest "Descendant combinators" instead of "Descendant selectors"
> and more generally use "combinators" when appropriate (5.5 -> 5.7)
For page titles, I went with reproducing the section titles in the
specification, but I'm willing to be talked out of that approach if enough
people agree with you.
>5.7 Adjacent selectors
> I have one general comment on testing selectors that some browsers
> don't implement : using - if it is correctly implemented - the
> grouping mechanism and the error handling allows to build confirmed
> tests :
> E, F + G { color :red }
> E and G are red if and only if the rule is not thrown away because
> the selector's part is invalid...
So, in other words, if some relevant elements are red, then the browser
is parsing the selector side correctly, thus testing a browser's
forward-compatible parsing with respect to selectors. Right? I just want
to make sure I understand where you're going with this.
>5.8.1 Attribute Selectors
> A[HREF="http://www.w3.org/"] {color: maroon;}
>
> I suggest testing some other element/attribute pair...
...as in something like this?
A[HREF="http://www.erehwon.zzz/"] {color: maroon;}
>5.8.3 Class selectors
> The first rule needs the implementation of the universal selector.
> For instance NS4.7 on my platform correctly implements class
> selectors but not "*". So your test is false but it should be true...
> Suggestion : test only with a real type element selector
A good point, but at the same time, I'm trying to reproduce the examples
in the specification as much as possible. What do other people think: is
this sort of cross-contamination of CSS2 features undesirable?
Otherwise, good suggestions with which I agree. Look for changes in the
next few hours.
--
Eric A. Meyer - eam3@po.cwru.edu - http://www.cwru.edu/home/eam3.html
Editor, Style Sheets Reference Guide http://style.webreview.com/
Coordinator, W3C CSS Test Suite http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/
Member, WSP CSS Technical Committee http://www.webstandards.org/
Received on Monday, 22 November 1999 11:51:12 UTC