On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Elliott Sprehn <[email protected]>wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 3:31 PM, Dirk Pranke <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Elliott Sprehn <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Dirk Pranke <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I think this raises two related questions, both of which would be >>>> helped by concrete examples: >>>> >>>> 1) What sort of test are you writing where 800x600 isn't big enough to >>>> test what you need to test? >>>> >>>> 2) What sort of test are you writing where there's needs to be >>>> something on the page not included in the test >>>> *and* will render differently in different browsers? >>>> >>>> I can posit the existence of both sorts of things, but I'm not sure >>>> when they arise in practice? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> I've seen tests before that have lots of form controls where a bunch >>> were outside the viewport. >>> >> >> Sure, you *can* write such tests. Did you *have to*? >> >> > Certainly not, I just know such tests already exist. > > Right, so in the absence of tests that *need* bigger viewports, I'd side w/ David and say that we should fix tests to fit within 800x600 so that they are portable to other browsers and meet the W3C's criteria. Looking at the entire page would be a bad idea, as it would let us tolerate non-conformant tests. -- Dirk
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
