- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 23:02:17 +0200
- To: "Mark Moore" <mark.moore@notlimited.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org, "'Ian Hickson'" <ian@hixie.ch>, tantekc@microsoft.com
On Thursday, July 22, 2004, 12:22:48 AM, Mark wrote: MM> 1) The '.xml' extension doesn't match any of the proposed extensions MM> documented in Section 3.7 of the CSS2.1 Test Case Authoring Guidelines. [1] Being able to deal with xml is however a common requirement. MM> Unless there is some other compelling reason, I would suggest changing the MM> extension for XHTML tests to 'xhtml'. I agree for the xhtml tests; for the xml tests that are not (supposed to be ) xhtl (although they are obfuscated xhtml) .xml is appropriate. MM> Due to various limitations (primarily of IE6), neither the 'xhm', nor the MM> 'xml' extensions are particularly good. If the tests are renamed with the MM> xhtml extension, the tests can be loaded using Firefox, Mozilla, Opera, MM> *and* IE6. MM> For the interested, '.xml' files cause IE6 to parse the identified DTD MM> (xhtml11.dtd). The DTD for XHTML 1.1 is modular, and IE6 incorrectly barfs MM> on the missing but IGNORE'd xhtml-prefw-redecl.mod. Yes (although wasn't that fixed in the latest msxml?) MM> In addition, IE6 uses the "file extension" to determine which application MM> should handle the received content even though URI's don't have file MM> extensions. For URI's ending in '.xht', IE6 attempts to open the (unknown) MM> associated application, and the user is presented with a useless "Open MM> With..." dialog. Aww, its not useless. The user can pick Firefox instead .... ok ok MM> 2) The tests correctly enclose the content of the <style> element in MM> '<![CDATA[' and ']]>' CDATA section markers [2], but few of the current MM> browsers I assume you mean html browsers. SVG browsers do use and understand this, its a commonly used syntax (actually we had to get a couple of implementations no not *require* it :) MM> handle this syntax (probably due to the incompatible definition of MM> <style> element content between HTML 4, and XHTML 1). The effect is that MM> the first rule is ignored (or all rules in the case of Firefox). Bleurgh. MM> I would suggest eliminating the CDATA section markers from the tests since MM> this exercises a feature of the XHTML parser, and shouldn't affect the MM> results unless a '<', or '&' are included within the content of the <style> MM> element. In that case there should be a separate test that tests this specific feature. MM> Although css1test11.xml contains a '<', it works without the CDATA MM> section markers because the XHTML parser sees this as a comment, I find that very worrying. <!-- and --> with no intervening - is a comment. MM> but the CSS parser sees it as a CDO token. MM> 3) PNG images are used in 75 of the tests, while GIF images are used in 4. MM> The use of PNG's doesn't add anything to the tests, I suggest altering the remaining 4 GIFs to PNG unless they are animated. MM> yet eliminates UA's that MM> don't render this format (most notably IE6). There comes a point where, if the implementation is crappy, you have to say so. MM> I would recommend converting 28 distinct PNG's to GIF. I would be MM> happy to provide this conversion if that would help. No, it would not (file format conversion is trivial, especially in this case), and I would oppose this change. MM> If you elect *not* to convert the PNG's, I would suggest converting the MM> remaining GIF's so you can minimize the requirements of the UA's rendering MM> engine. On the other hand that is a much better suggestion. MM> 4) A number of the tests use the 'Ahem' font (93 to be precise). Although I MM> can understand the convenience of the technique, it relies heavily on the MM> particular handling of font rendering which is explicitly left to the MM> implementer in places (e.g. height of inline, non-replaced elements [3]). Good point. The SVG test suite uses an 'empty' SVG font for a similar purpose (it only has a 'missing glyph' and no other glyphs). Although in that case the font metrics are well defined. MM> Worse, it implicitly requires all conformant UA's to implement a font MM> mechanism that can accept the Ahem font, port the Ahem font to their MM> platform, or rewrite the 93 tests according to the "interoperable' MM> definition. [4] Oh, I see, its an actual font? What is the problem (apart from platforms that ddo not allow font install)? MM> I would suggest carefully limiting the number of tests that rely on the Ahem MM> font. I believe most (if not all) of the Ahem tests can be rewritten to MM> accomplish the same effects using inline replaced elements. Clearly, MM> precise testing of the font-size property will not benefit from inline MM> images, but there should be ways to test this property without requiring MM> Ahem. MM> I would also suggest that a link to the Ahem download page [5] be included MM> either in the body, or in the head of any test that does require the Ahem MM> font. Good suggestion. MM> [1] http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/guidelines.html#filenames MM> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xhtml1-20020801/#h-4.8 MM> [3] MM> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/CR-CSS21-20040225/visudet.html#inline-non-replaced MM> [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/CR-CSS21-20040225/cover.html MM> [5] http://www.hixie.ch/tests/evil/mixed/lineheight4.html >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ian Hickson [mailto:ian@hixie.ch] >> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 8:03 AM >> To: Mark Moore >> Cc: tantekc@microsoft.com >> Subject: Re: [CSS21] Test Suite >> >> On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Mark Moore wrote: >> > >> > According to the CSS2.1 CR, a test suite is required as one of the key >> > exit criteria, but I haven't been able to find either the suite, or the >> > current status of features, implementations, or interoperability. >> >> The suite is being written. I have a work-in-progress dump at: >> >> http://www.hixie.ch/tests/evil/css/css21/source/raw-tests/ >> >> ...but it is far from complete. >> >> The current status of features, implementations, and interoperability is >> changing on a daily basis and is not tracked anywhere to my knowledge. >> >> -- >> Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL >> http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. >> Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
Received on Thursday, 22 July 2004 17:02:27 UTC