I just realized I've forgotten to attach the current version of the writing-mode property patch, so here :>
0001-Add-support-for-parsing-the-writing-mode-property-v2.patch
Description: Binary data
On 2013-06-11, at 9:54 AM, Caitlin Potter <[email protected]> wrote: > I still have not added any tests explicitly regarding the writing-mode > property, however I have gotten everything to a stage where all tests are > passing, which previously was not the case. > > I could use some guidance writing parse/select tests for the property because > even after studying the test programs and data files, it's not really obvious > what the system is -- And beyond that, since I'm not really a CSS guru by any > means, it is likely that I would write incorrect expectations when e.g. > important is used. > > It seems that there will also be a few more properties to add, including > 'text-orientation' and 'direction', I'm not sure if I should add those as > part of this patch or perhaps add those in subsequent chunks. > > You're all busy people so when you have some time just give me a nod and I'll > see what I can do. > > On 2013-06-07, at 5:12 AM, John-Mark Bell <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Fri, 2013-06-07 at 04:09 -0400, Caitlin Potter wrote: >>> This patch is intended to support the parsing and storage of the >>> "writing-mode" property, which is one of the building blocks for >>> vertical text in css (support for which is currently required by the >>> HTML5 track element and obviously is a pretty important localization >>> feature -- and just simply looks cool, too). >> >> Excellent. Thanks for your work on this. >> >> [...] >> >>> It is quite likely that there are things substantially wrong, >>> including the lack of test data (I haven't figured out how to get the >>> test suite to even build and run yet, `make test` seems to fail >>> substantially here.) >> >> You're using a Mac, right? I've no current idea why make test isn't >> working for you on that platform, as the test infrastructure is pretty >> trivial. We're investigating that now. >> >>> So some review would be good, I'd like to get this approved by netsurf >>> devs before trying to squeeze it into mozilla-servo. >> >> In general, this looks fine to me (modulo the lack of test data, which >> you've mentioned above). There are a few minor whitespace nits, which >> can be fixed when we merge the change in. Additionally, there's a stray >> commented-out chunk in css__set_writing_mode_from_hint. This, too is >> trivially fixed, so I'm not concerned by it. >> >> >> J. >> >> >> >> >
