[CSSWG] Minutes and Resolutions 2010-12-01

Summary:

   - RESOLVED: Publish CSS2.1 as Last Call (any unedited issues deferred as LC comments)
   - Reviewed status of CSS2.1 test suite and harness
   - Reviewed status of various failing tests

====== Full minutes below ======

Present:
   Tab Atkins
   David Baron
   Bert Bos
   Arron Eicholz
   Elika Etemad
   Simon Fraser
   Koji Ishii
   Brad Kemper
   Håkon Wium Lie
   Chris Lilley
   Peter Linss
   Daniel Weck
   Steve Zilles

<RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/12/01-CSS-irc
Scribe: Bert

CSS 2.1 LC
----------

   plinss: We are past deadline for LC for CSS 2.1. But are there changes still expected?
   ChrisL: I think we can publish. No major changes.
   <ChrisL> We are better to publish now and dealwith any changes as lc comments
   Arron: ditto.
   RESOLVED: publish CSS 2.1 as last call
   plinss: Are all edits in the text?
   Bert: yes.

CSS2.1 Testing
--------------

   Tab: How do we note the failures?
   dbaron: I didn't comment on some tests, because I think the test is correct.
   plinss: Other implementers?
   <dbaron> That said, I think it's a lot easier to prove a test incorrect
            than to prove a test correct.
   ChrisL: I did some of the Prince tests.
   ChrisL: But some problems with building the suite.
   ChrisL: Worked with some old tests.
   ChrisL: So need to check against new ones.
   <dbaron> (and the "some tests" I mentioned are those that are tests for
            features Gecko implements)
   <plinss_> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027.zip
   plinss: RC3 is in harness. SVN head version largely the same.
   JJansen: Yes, same as 1027
   plinss: What is in RC3 is largely not changed.
   plinss: What shows up on blocking page is not yet marked in database.
   plinss: What is on wiki *has* been marked.
   JJansen: Do we have updated timeline?
   fantasai: Waiting for some replies from Arron. And a number of comments
             on MS tests not yet addressed.
   Arron: Probably just lost in the hundreds of pages... I'm going throught
          hundreds of e-mails, but so far I have zero edits to make.
   Arron: Will reply to you as soon as I checked all e-mail. They are not
          all tagged corectly.
   Arron: Will try this week.
   fantasai: Any that you didn't change?
   Arron: I've changed all, as far as I know.
   plinss: Everything that is marked as invalid in harness has been changed
           in RC4?
   fantasai: I will check. Do you have a link?
   <plinss_> http://test.csswg.org/harness/results?s=CSS21_%HTML_RC3&t=0&f[]=1&f[]=2&f[]=4&f[]=16
   JJansen: We can move forward without waiting for Arron's mail, I hope?
   fantasai: Let me verify.
   JJansen: Just wanting to streamline the process.
   fantasai: OK, don't need to wait for Arron.
   fantasai: I'll go through the e-mails to verify for him.
   JJansen: Yes, Arron can do this, but just no need to block RC4.
   plinss: Only run changed tests, no need to run all tests of RC4.
           Harness can show that.

   plinss: So we're left with the tests we're blocked on...
   <TabAtkins> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/font-family-rule-011.htm
   <plinss_> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/font-family-rule-011.htm
   TabAtkins: Question on one test [see URL]
   ... Unquoted "default" keyword.
   ... Is that a keyword in CSS 2?
   <oyvind> it's reserved
   dbaron: I think it is reserved.
   ... In the para "If quoting is omitted..."
   <ChrisL> reserved for future expansion
   TabAtkins: OK, that's is confusing. We were looking at the syntax.
   ... It will mean either 'initial' or 'inherit', won't it?
   <dbaron> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/fonts.html#font-family-prop says:
   <dbaron> The keywords 'initial' and 'default' are reserved for future use
            and must also be quoted when used as font names. UAs must not
            consider these keywords as matching the '<family-name>' type.
   dbaron: That is the idea, but not sure we'll actually do it.
   TabAtkins: I think I have all the fonts, but I stil don't get all columns
              numbered.
   ChrisL: That is wrong, then.
   TabAtkins: But should we test whether the font works, or whether it bolds?
   Arron: Mail jdaggett with the issue.
   dbaron: I get all numbers in Chrome on Linux.
   TabAtkins: I get some only, this is on Windows.
   plinss: font-family-rule-11 passes in IE and Chrome.
   ... According to your report.
   TabAtkins: Let me check...
   ... No, it doesn't. I must have hit the wrong button.
   plinss: Then I will update the DB accordingly.

   howcome: I talked to Prince. Maybe they can help with run-in, but I have no
            results yet.
   plinss: We have one pass on most of those.
   JJansen: IE passes about ten of them.

   TabAtkins: I have one more issue:
   <TabAtkins> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/run-in-breaking-002.htm
   ... We have the wrong borders. Is that significant?
   dbaron: The test asserts line breaking and borders must be correct.
   * oyvind wishes reftests could have a link to the ref in <meta>
   Simon: Webkit fails, it seems.
   BradK: Looks right in my webkit...
   TabAtkins: Is there a similar test without run-in?
   dbaron: I'm not sure the border assertion is actually correct.
   ... It is a ltr run-in and a rtl block. I'll have to check that.
   <bradk> I take it back. The missing borders are on the opposite sides
           of what the text says
   JJansen: Chrome breaking looks correct.
   TabAtkins: Not sure. Should it be on the other side?
   BradK: Maybe the spec is wrong then.

   TabAtkins: We still not pass background intrinsic, but I'll need to study
              that more carefully first.
   BradK: Contradiction? Test says there should be no border there.
   dbaron: I don't think the test is ambiguous. But it may be incorrect.
   TabAtkins: But it says there *should*  be border between "header" and "Start".
   dbaron: Ah yes.
   plinss: Are we agreeing on the spec?
   dbaron: I think Chrome is correct. The test assertion needs to be corrected.
   JJansen: IE has a catastrophic break, but if we ignore that, it matches
            chrome.
   plinss: Does somebody ping Boris about the test?
   dbaron: Yes, I will.
   plinss: Any other tests we can review?
   dbaron: Says the test dates from before our decision on inheritance.
   TabAtkins: But inheritance is always the document tree. Anything else
              would be insane.
   fantasai: There are sometimes anonymous boxes, that don't exist in the
             doc tree.
   dbaron: Boris agrees the text about vertical borders in the test is backwards.
   <dbaron> bz says he can fix the test in svn

   * ChrisL thanks for the ms response on css3-color btw
   * sylvaing np; sorry we missed it the first round
   * ChrisL google missed it too *cough*
   * sylvaing yeah but they're not evil so it's ok

   plinss: Can we look at the margin collapse tests?
   <dbaron> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/bidi-breaking-002.htm
   fantasai: We had resolved that line separator behavior is undefined.
   fantasai: One test fails, but it is a "may."

   dbaron: A bunch of tests without passes. Not sure we can discuss them.
   <dbaron> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/abspos-non-replaced-width-margin-000.htm
   <dbaron> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/abspos-replaced-width-margin-000.htm
   dbaron: [see URLs]. These are almost exhaustive tests for al
            combinations. Ref tests.
   dbaron: We can probably split them and get more passes. But that probably
           still not leads to 2 passes for all of them.
   plinss: I see reports that IE7 passes, but also that it fails...
   <smfr> TabAtkins: not <link rel="alternate" 
href="http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/layout/reftests/abspos-non-replaced-width-offset-margin.html"> ?
   TabAtkins: Where is the reference? I don't see it linked.
   <TabAtkins> smfr: Well, that file doesn't exist at all.
   * Bert seems to lose sound
   <plinss_> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/reftest.list
   <dbaron> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/abspos-non-replaced-width-margin-000-ref.htm
   dbaron: Add -ref to the URl to find the reference.
   <dbaron> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/abspos-replaced-width-margin-000-ref.htm

   plinss: Working on improvement to harness. But see the manifest [URL above].
   plinss Some tests have multiple refs.
   TabAtkins: That doesn't make sense.
   plinss: There are multiple ways to make the same result.
   dbaron: Reftests test equivalence between features. There may be more
           than two equivalent features.
   plinss: Manifest has several lines for same test.
   dbaron: But indeed not marked in metadata in the test. Could be reworked,
           but haven't done it.
   plinss: I'm planning to add links in the wrapper in the harness.
   plinss: We'll also have *negative* refs in RC4, what should *not* match.
   Simon: useful to have sometihing in manifest that says there are multiple refs.
   fantasai: Like what?
   Simon: Some keyword I can look for.
   fantasai: The manifest has a fixed format. Can put it in the metadata.
   Simon: That would probably be OK.
   dbaron: The test we were talking about, I'd like to ask implementers to
           look at their bugs.

   Simon: It's a complex test. Splitting it out would indeed help.
   dbaron: Relatively straightforward to edit test and reference. They are
           aligned line by line.
   Simon: I'll try to get Hyatt to look at this.
   JJansen: A propos of IE7: IE7 fails.

   dbaron: We might soon have two additional tests on the zero-passes list,
           because one fix I made caused two other tests to now fail.
   fantasai: Update to spec in 2007 had not been incorporated in the tests.
   plinss: That will then give us one pass. Still need a second one...
   TabAtkins: I'm willing to try...
   fantasai: Hyatt wasn't sure about making the change. Somebody should talk
             to him.
   <fantasai> He didn't want to change margin collapsing code without
              adequate test coverage
   <fantasai> which we didn't have when I talked about it with him last
   dbaron: Table background tests: it looks like Opera is very close.
   <dbaron> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/table-backgrounds-bs-row-001.htm
   dbaron: Some spacing in horizontal direction only.
   <dbaron> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/table-backgrounds-bs-rowgroup-001.htm
   dbaron: While webkit doesn't pass at all.
   dbaron: Can Opera fix that?
   <dbaron> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/table-backgrounds-bs-row-001-ref.htm
   dbaron: I haven't looked at IE.
   <dbaron> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/table-backgrounds-bs-rowgroup-001-ref.htm
   howcome: You think it is the same issue in both?
   dbaron: That is what it looks like, yes.
   howcome: I will take a look at that.

   plinss: I will work on harness and reftest. It looks like the web spider
           attack on it is under control.

Meeting closed.

<RRSAgent> http://www.w3.org/2010/12/01-CSS-minutes.html

Received on Thursday, 2 December 2010 08:26:28 UTC