W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2013

RE: [CSS21] Reviews and tests needed for errata (s.15.3a: font name “inherit”)

From: Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 15:51:17 -0400
Message-ID: <75b669176ac46a49015ab6b0a8e19ecd.squirrel@ed-sh-cp3.entirelydigital.com>
To: "Arron Eicholz" <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>
Cc: "Rebecca Hauck" <rhauck@adobe.com>, "www-style mailing list" <www-style@w3.org>

Le Mar 30 juillet 2013 13:26, Arron Eicholz a écrit :
> On Monday, July 29, 2013 7:04 PM Gérard Talbot wrote:
>> Le Lun 29 juillet 2013 20:28, Rebecca Hauck a écrit :
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> >>From last week's telecon, ACTION-571 [1] -
>> >
>> > I've assessed the work that needs to be done in the test suites to
>> get
>> > ready for republishing. There are approximately 240 existing tests
>> for
>> > the
>> > 22 items listed in the errata.  With some advanced searching in
>> > Shepherd, I was able to identify which have no tests and which have
>> > pertinent tests that may (need to be) modified to accurately reflect
>> > the new language in the spec.  Details all on the wiki [2] - see "CSS
>> > 2.1 Errata."  Note that the Shepherd queries there are filtered
>> within
>> > each spec section to be as relevant possible to the changes described
>> > in the errata and in the corresponding minutes.
>> >
>> > Please let me know if you are familiar with any of these items and
>> > have time to review or write tests associated with them.  I've not
>> > gone through this process before, so I'd be interested to hear how
>> the
>> > work required has been assigned and completed in the past. Just as a
>> > data point, and as a logical start to addressing these, I added names
>> > of people who proposed the change and who are listed as Owners of the
>> tests.
>> >
>> > I'm happy to manage and track this process and will use this wiki &
>> > Shepherd to do so.  I'd like continue this discussion at the upcoming
>> > telecon to solicit help from WG members on these items.
>> >
>> > Let me know if I missed anything or if you have questions.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > -Rebecca
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > [1] https://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/actions/571
>> > [2] http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1
>> >
>>
>> The only and sole test that needs to be reviewed and approved for
>> s.15.3a
>> (clarification) has to be:
>>
>> [src]
>> http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/gtalbot/submitted/font-family-
>> rule-004a.xht
>>
>> [nightly-unstable]
>> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/font-family-rule-
>> 004a.htm
>>
>> since it checks 9 ways of declaring font-family with inherit (with and
>> without
>> quotes).
>>
>> Also, it would be best if the current
>>
>> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/font-family-rule-
>> 004.htm
>>
>> would be removed and replaced with
>>
>> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/font-family-rule-
>> 004a.htm
>>
>
> While I agree that font-family-rule-004a is a better test in general it is
> not testing the specific scenario that is in the 004 case. Both are still
> necessary at the moment because the 004 case tests that a font named
> inherit can actually be loaded and used if quoted.

Okay. Agreed.

Gérard
-- 
CSS 2.1 Test suite RC6, March 23rd 2011
http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/toc.html

Contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/

Web authors' contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/web-authors-contributions-css21-testsuite.html
Received on Tuesday, 30 July 2013 19:51:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:13 UTC