[css-writing-modes-3] value-all-002 and value-all-003 : comments, feedback and question

Masataka,

[src]
http://test.csswg.org/source/css-writing-modes-3/value-all-002.html

[nightly-unstable]
http://test.csswg.org/suites/css-writing-modes-3_dev/nightly-unstable/html/value-all-002.htm

[reference file]
http://test.csswg.org/source/css-writing-modes-3/reference/vertical-ahem-1x1-ref.html

If you use the Ahem font, then it is preferable to also define the 
line-height on block elements when you define the Ahem font size. 
Otherwise, the gap between line boxes will be different from browsers to 
browsers.

When line-height is not defined, then 'line-height' defaults to 'normal' 
and 'normal' computes to 1 in Webkit-based browsers and IE while it will 
compute to 1.2 in Firefox for the Ahem font.

Try this page in several browsers:

http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/experiments-va-lineheight-02.html

Not specifying the line-height can make your reference file or your test 
unreliable. Here, how you created the reference file 
vertical-ahem-1x1-ref does not make your test incorrect.

Personally, I try to use images in reference file: that way, I am sure 
the reference file uses a different method from the test. What you did 
in the reference file vertical-ahem-1x1-ref looks fine.

If the test should create an 80px by 80px black area, then I recommend 
to replace "rectangles" with "squares": this will help the person taking 
that test in the test harness.

I examined your value-all-002 test because the black shapes are not 
perfectly identical (Koji also noticed this! [1]) in Chrome 45.0.2431.0 
... for unknown reasons right now. I tried to use a font-size of 75px 
which would be dividable by 3 and dividable by 5 to avoid rounding 
issues but this does not seem to be the reason why the black areas are 
not perfectly identical. So, there may be a bug in Chrome after all.

[1] :
http://test.csswg.org/shepherd/testcase/value-all-002/spec/css-writing-modes-3/status/issue/#comment-2f386058f4ee

-----------


[src]
http://test.csswg.org/source/css-writing-modes-3/value-all-003.html

[nightly-unstable]
http://test.csswg.org/suites/css-writing-modes-3_dev/nightly-unstable/html/value-all-003.htm

[reference file]
http://test.csswg.org/source/css-writing-modes-3/reference/vertical-ahem-1x1-ref.html

I would like you to help me understand the spec thanks to this test.

"
all
     Attempt to typeset horizontally all consecutive characters within 
the box such that they take up the space of a single character within 
the vertical line box.

digits <integer>?

     Attempt to typeset horizontally each maximal sequence of consecutive 
ASCII digits (U+0030–U+0039) that has as many or fewer characters than 
the specified integer such that it takes up the space of a single 
character within the vertical line box. If the integer is omitted, it 
computes to 2. Integers outside the range 2-4 are invalid.
"
9.1 Horizontal-in-Vertical Composition: the text-combine-upright 
property
http://www.w3.org/TR/css-writing-modes-3/#text-combine-upright

There seems to be no implicit (and no explicit) range limit to the 
number of consecutive characters when using 'text-combine-upright: all' 
but there is a range 2-4 limit with 'text-combine-upright: digits n': is 
that correct? To me, this seems odd and incoherent.

If there is no range limitation with 'text-combine-upright: all', then 
why should there be one with 'text-combine-upright: digits n' where 'n' 
would be a [2-9] digit?

Gérard
-- 
Test Format Guidelines
http://testthewebforward.org/docs/test-format-guidelines.html

Test Style Guidelines
http://testthewebforward.org/docs/test-style-guidelines.html

Test Templates
http://testthewebforward.org/docs/test-templates.html

CSS Naming Guidelines
http://testthewebforward.org/docs/css-naming.html

Test Review Checklist
http://testthewebforward.org/docs/review-checklist.html

CSS Metadata
http://testthewebforward.org/docs/css-metadata.html

Received on Monday, 22 June 2015 00:10:39 UTC