Should CSS 2 be part of this test suite?

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:

• features that are currently only defined in CSS 2, such as the visibility and z-index properties
• features that are redefined in modules that are “not ready for implementation”, such as border-collapse, border-spacing, caption-side, empty-cells, table-layout properties of CSS Table Module Level 3
• features that are now deprecated, such asclip in CSS Masking Module Level 1
• several selectors (+, >, * etc.)
• several properties whose syntax was not extended such as border, margin, padding and font longhands
• a lot of values or units (for width, float, position properties etc.)

Sometimes, the tests do exist, but are just put in other modules (for example, the direction property).

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.

[LeaVerou]

And for the web platform tests the CSS WG is also striving for completeness, right?

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).

Correct info about overall support

Define “correct”. Should html5test.com also test <p> and <a> to show “correct info about overall support”?

Correct placement of tests (some tests that should be for CSS 2 are tested for newer specs)

Some examples would be useful.

Easier for test authors when features get extended

Could you elaborate?

[SebastianZ]

Correct placement of tests (some tests that should be for CSS 2 are tested for newer specs)

Some examples would be useful.

All of Color Level 3, several cursor values, background-position, counter-increment, and more.

Why should Color L3 be under CSS2?!

My fault. Just some of the values are already defined in CSS 2.

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? 😉

No concession is needed, if you want to add these tests, I’m not going to stop you! 😊 I don’t think these tests do much harm (except a slight perf hit), I just think it’s a colossal waste of time to add them. But it’s your time, so I don’t get a say with how you spend it. 😶

Ok, time is wasted, patch is ready. 😉

Sebastian