- From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
- Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:37:10 +1000
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, "Boris Zbarsky (bzbarsky@MIT.EDU)" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 9/08/2011 8:04 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Brian Manthos<brianman@microsoft.com> wrote: >> Please submit some test cases on this. Because it's gone well beyond simple at this point. > > The CSS2.1 testsuite somewhat tests this already in > <http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/background-intrinsic-006.htm>, > though it's limited by the lack of background-size, which wasn't > introduced until B&B. For example, Chrome fails this for silly > reasons - we first size the viewport to be 40%/60% of the background > canvas, then size the<svg> to be 40%/60% of the viewport bounds. > > This will be tested thoroughly by the B&B testsuite, when it's > written. Would you like a few impromptu testcases now? > > ~TJ I can provide some of these test or test that can be rewritten for the test suite. I was intending of demonstrating the bug in WebKit (not just Chrome) about sizing the background-image svg to the viewport instead of the background canvas since it breaks when certain background properties are transitioned. This is why WebKit handles the below test wrong. http://css-class.com/test/css/3/backgrounds/svg-intrisic-size-transition.htm The sizing works correctly in Gecko with transitioning. The sizing works correctly in Opera 11.50 (Opera 11.11 was buggy) and IE10 but with no transitioning. I have further test with various heights or widths given in both pixel and percentages for the SVGs. -- Alan Gresley http://css-3d.org/ http://css-class.com/
Received on Tuesday, 9 August 2011 00:37:29 UTC