I think we shouldn't be hard-coding 18px here: {'value': '18px', 'pad': '<span style="font-size: large">[foobarbaz]</span>', 'expected': ['<span style="font-size: large">[foobarbaz]</span>', '<span style="font-size: large">[foobarbaz]</span>'], 'command': 'fontsize', 'id': 'FS:18px_SPANs:fs:l-1_SW', 'desc': 'Change existing font size to equivalent px size (should be noop, or change unit)'}
The pixel font value of font-size: large is different depending on whether or not we're in strict/quirks modes and whether or not we're using fixed font (at least in WebKit and probably in Firefox). We should be using the computed style value of the text instead. - Ryosuke On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rn...@webkit.org> wrote: > I also noticed: > > RTE2-CC_FN:a_FONTf:a-1_SI fontname 'courier' y y y y FAIL <font > face="arial">foo[bar]baz</font> <font face="arial">foo[bar]baz</font> <font > face="arial">foo</font><spanclass="apple-style-span" style="font-family: > courier">[bar]</span><font face="arial">baz</font> Change existing font > name to same font name, using CSS styling (should be noop) > > Isn't supposed to be fontname 'arial' instead? There are 4 other tests > below this one with the seemingly the same problem. > > - Ryosuke > > On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rn...@webkit.org> wrote: > >> However, we pass JustifyLeft, JustifyRight, JustifyCenter even though we >> also add BR in those cases. I don't quite understand the difference >> there... >> >> - Ryosuke >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 6:58 PM, Roland Steiner <rolandstei...@google.com >> > wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Ryosuke Niwa <rn...@webkit.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Mn... I realized something strange here. >>>> >>>> RTE2-AC_JF_TEXT-1_SC fails on WebKit TOT and the test is: JustifyFull on >>>> "foo^bar". However, it clearly works on WebKit when I test it manually. >>>> It >>>> generates <div style="text-align: justify;">foobar<br></div>. I'm not sure >>>> why the test claims that WebKit fails on this particular test. >>>> >>> >>> That is probably one of the areas that needs discussion - the way the >>> suite is set up currently, it doesn't allow for "superfluous" HTML elements. >>> I.e., my guess is that it fails because of the extra <br> (ATM I don't have >>> a TOT WebKit browser, so can't confirm for sure). I have added cases like >>> this as "acceptable" (but not ideal) results for some tests, but not yet all >>> of them (if we want to add this, then I guess I should implement some >>> systematic way to check these rather than adding it by hand, though). >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> - Roland >>> >> >> >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev