Should CSS 2 be part of this test suite? #208
Comments
|
I was also already thinking about adding all the CSS 2 stuff a while back. And generally, I agree with it, especially in regard of completeness. A few notes:
Sebastian |
|
I'm not sure. My take:
Fwiw, despite the name of the testsuite, if e.g. a level 4 module deprecates a level 3 feature, I believe we've tended to remove that feature. Note that this is just my take, not a veto. If there is consensus to include these things, I will concede. :) |
|
I think it would be nice to be the most exhaustive. Also for those who add testing. We need to remember all that is in the CSS 2 and not added it, so we can not refer to the test.js. As for what is obsolete, I do not have too much opinion. The browser often continues to keep the compatibility with aliases. What I see, the test base evolves, obsolete modules are often removed. |
|
I think we should ask ourselves what does being exhaustive get us? Who or what does it serve to see that all browsers support e.g. |
As I said, when browsers are still required to implement it, I tend to say that it should get tested. Though that's probably another thing where we shouldn't let it count towards the overall percentage.
That's the point that let me hasitate to suggest it myself, though I can still see the point for having an exhaustive test suite.
In most cases that's true though I've also already seen a few things get implemented in browsers even after 20 years. And some things of CSS 2 like Sebastian |
Then we can just add those things. We don't need to add the entirety of CSS 2 to test these things. |
|
Hey @LeaVerou, a little off-topic from css3test site. I'm interested in having CSS 2 tests the same way there's the CSS 3 file. Is there any way where I can look for those and create a css2 site, for example? Thanks and sorry if this isn't aligned with the issue I didn't want to open a new issue for this :( |
|
We don't generally add tests for CSS 2 as it's pretty well supported, but feel free to fork it! |
|
Hey @LeaVerou, sure. I wanted to know if the format is something that exists in any other place. I was looking at https://github.com/mdn/data/tree/master/css but seems not exactly the same. I believe CSS 2 is as big if not bigger than CSS 3, just wanted to avoid creating those manually or making a script for it. |
|
Not sure what you mean by "if the format is something that exists in any other place"? |
|
I mean if there was a place with the content of |
|
Seems like a lot of work for little benefit 🤷🏽♀️ |
We are talking about tests, not specifications. And for the web platform tests the CSS WG is also striving for completeness, right? Anyway, I'll try to summarize what was mentioned so far:
Maybe @davesnx can add his use case for having the data. Sebastian |
css3test is not WPT, they have very distinct purposes. WPT needs to be extensive yes, but WPT also tests full conformance, so even CSS 2 features could be failing in some ways. css3test only tests recognition, and its aim is to give developers a quick view of which modern features a browser supports at a glance. Adding a bunch of tests that every browser passes and has done so for over a decade just adds noise and does not help anyone achieve anything. It's the same reason we avoid adding tests that no browser passes (yet).
Define "correct". Should html5test.com also test
Some examples would be useful.
Could you elaborate? |
It should at least include all elements that are not supported by all browsers, but yes, for completeness, also those that have thorough support, at least optionally.
All of Color Level 3, several
See #208 (comment).
From what I read above, all three recent contributors agree to add it. And I almost have a patch ready for review. So when's the point you'll concede? 😉 Note that I tend to agree with you that CSS 2 should not be included in the score by default but at least be available via a filter to show really everything. Sebastian |
Why should Color L3 be under CSS2?!
No concession is needed, if you want to add these tests, I’m not going to stop you! 😊 |
My fault. Just some of the values are already defined in CSS 2.
Ok, time is wasted, patch is ready. 😉 Sebastian |
The CSS Snapshot states that CSS 3 is defined by a core part, CSS 2, extended by several modules.
These modules define new properties, selectors etc. or replace some existing terms in CSS 2.
However several definitions that were already in CSS 2 are untested in this test suite.
This includes:
visibilityandz-indexpropertiesborder-collapse,border-spacing,caption-side,empty-cells,table-layoutproperties of CSS Table Module Level 3clipin CSS Masking Module Level 1+,>,*etc.)border,margin,paddingandfontlonghandswidth,float,positionproperties etc.)Sometimes, the tests do exist, but are just put in other modules (for example, the
directionproperty).Basically, adding / moving tests would make this "syntactic" test suite more exhaustive and would show more clearly what's actually new in modules, especially the first levels.
However, i guess a lot of these features, if not all of them, are supported by every major browser for a long time now, and adding tests would increase score of all the browsers. But it's hard to say if there are discrepancies without... testing.
It is worth it? I can try to prepare a PR if it's a goal of this project.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: