On Feb 23, 2010, at 8:14 AM, Darin Adler wrote:
On Feb 23, 2010, at 8:08 AM, Ariya Hidayat wrote:
When the test is run, the browser loads both files, takes
snapshots, and does a pixel comparison. Thus font differences
between platforms become less of an issue.
Isn't it our existing pixel test infrastructure? Or do you mean
something else?
In pixel tests, the expected file is a checked-in image. In
addition, we still have a render tree dump; it’s not just pixels.
In reference tests, the expected file is HTML; different than the
test file, typically simple markup. Both files are rendered and the
resulting pixels are compared. And I presume there would be no
render tree dump.
The challenge with reftests is coming up with different markup that's
supposed to render exactly the same, but for unrelated reasons. While
it's possible, for example, to compare a table layout to absolute
positioned boxes, for some things you get down to primitives that
can't be tested independently. For example you can test that <b>,
<strong> and font-weight: bold have the same results, but none of that
tells you whether bold in fact works. You could have a regression
which caused bold to be completely ignored and would not be able to
catch it with a reftest. Even in cases where there are truly
independent ways to get the same visual result, it can be tricky to
design both.
That being said, it does do a good job of factoring out font
differences.
Regards,
Maciej
_______________________________________________
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
