- From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 15:31:44 -0800
- To: Geoffrey Sneddon <me@gsnedders.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAN9ydbUOZO3MC2YaY+y9UnVc4ZQw+-CbaJtY51U=Aw27y5v=DQ@mail.gmail.com>
Thank you Geoffrey for running the tests and filing a test bug. Anti-alias issues are not easy to deal with, as far as I understand, Gérard and Xidorn are working on it in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1258916. In general, Gérard is following the CSS test guidelines to avoid anti-alias issues, but the guidelines don't seem to be perfect. I agree that we should continue working on improving tests, and multiple vendors working together is important for issues like this, so your inputs are highly appreciated. I don't think, however, anti-alias issues can affect the spec status, tests can and should be improved regardless of the spec status. Hope W3C process experts can commet if I'm wrong. /koji 2017-01-12 14:48 GMT-08:00 Geoffrey Sneddon <me@gsnedders.com>: > Yesterday, we resolved to publish either a CR or, preferably if the > Process allows it, a PR of Writing Modes Level 3. > > However, I'm unconvinced we have a testsuite sufficient to leave CR > (and proceed to PR) with; we seem to have hundreds of reftests which > fail due to anti-aliasing differences. > > According to the test harness, Firefox passes 89.02% of the testsuite > (which it makes out to be 1120 tests); running locally all automated > tests, I get 1045 tests (910 parents, 135 subtests; as far as I'm > aware the harness has no notion of harnesses), of which 457 pass and > 588 fail: this implies that 89.02% of the entire testsuite cannot > pass. > > Looking into many of the failures, it quickly became apparent that > hundreds of these failures is down to anti-aliasing differences in > reftests; I've filed a bug for this at > <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-test/issues/1174>. > > As such, I at least don't view the testsuite as ready to publish a PR > and would raise a formal objection if we resolved to do so. > > /Geoffrey. > >
Received on Thursday, 12 January 2017 23:32:37 UTC