login bonus racebets free bet no deposit_login bonus betfred coupons_casino forums

Thu, 11 Oct 2018 20:25:23 -0700

On 10/12/18 3:59 AM, Geoffrey Garen wrote:
Honest question: What¡¯s gross about using @font-face?

It would be lots of test edits. That¡¯s a bummer.

But maybe it¡¯s clearer for the tests to specify the font they want to use. It 
makes the test self-describing, eliminating the requirement that the user take 
a step outside the test to get the right result.

Note that there's also the opposite opinion of loading a web font potentially hiding bugs:


Though I don't have such a strong opinion myself, I think @font-face is a fine solution for that problem (and other people seemed to be ok with that as well, looking at how that thread continues...).

I don't know if the CSSWG ended up taking an official position on this, but may be worth asking in www-style before doing he work of a mass-convert.

 -- Emilio


On Oct 11, 2018, at 6:01 PM, Dean Jackson <d...@apple.com> wrote:

It turns out that many (most?) of the CSS failures are because we no longer 
expose user-installed fonts, e.g. Ahem.


- update lots of tests to load Ahem via @font-face (yuck)
- allow Ahem to be used if installed (weird to special case one font, but 
probably ok)


On 12 Oct 2018, at 03:26, Philip J?genstedt <foo...@chromium.org> wrote:

Alright, I've written a one-off script [1] to find the Safari-only
failures, and here's the output:

Barring bugs, each of linked tests or one of its subtests should be
failing in Safari Technology Preview and passing in stable versions of
Chrome, Edge and Firefox.

Numerically, most of the failures are in css (622), encoding (135) and
html (60). With css, it's mostly css/CSS2.

I hope looking through this may be of use to you!

[1] https://github.com/foolip/ad-hoc-wpt-results-analysis

On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 11:50 PM Philip J?genstedt <foo...@chromium.org> wrote:

That filtering capability unfortunately does not yet exist on wpt.fyi
but it's a high priority and actively being worked on:

FWIW, I suspect that these purposes, comparing to the stable versions
of all *other* browsers might be the most useful:

Again, no way to filter on wpt.fyi, but I'll see if I can download the
full results and write a quick script.

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 11:49 PM Ryosuke Niwa <rn...@webkit.org> wrote:

Thanks for the intriguing data, Philip.

Is there a way to get a list of tests where all other browsers pass but Safari 
/ WebKit fail?

That would allow us to quickly identify the set of tests we can fix to improve 
the interoperability across browsers right away.

- R. Niwa

On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 3:45 AM Philip J?genstedt <foo...@chromium.org> wrote:

Hi WebKittens,

Fresh off the bots, I'm excited to report more robust Safari results,
and that Safari WPT pass rates are clearly improving! Thanks to the
hard work of Mike Pennisi [1] we now have the first Safari 12 results:
free online bettinghttps://wpt.fyi/results/?sha=ee2e69bfb1&product=safari-12.0

This uses the same setup as for Safari Technology Preview, which has
been running for a while [2] and are the results you see on the
"experimental" view:

This appears much more robust than the Safari 11 data we've collected
from Sauce Labs, and we can see a massive improvement between Safari
11 and 12:

This lumps together infrastructure improvements as well as Safari
11->12 improvements, but improvements in service-workers/ [3] stands
out, as well as in webdriver/, referrer-policy/, css/css-align/, and
others. (The effect of moving away from Sauce is mainly less

Also very interesting is to compare Safari 12 stable to TP:

One can tell that work is going in canvas-related things,
web-animations/, css/css-logical/ and more! \o/

I hope you'll all find these results valuable, and please report bugs
or feature requests here:

P.S. We're also trying to use use these diff views to spot
regressions. It's a bit hard to use, [4] but a fix in in progress [5]
and I might check back here when that works. I'll append to the end of
this email a non-exhaustive list of possible regressions already
possible to spot.

[1] https://github.com/web-platform-tests/results-collection/issues/604
[2] https://wpt.fyi/test-runs?labels=safari,experimental
[4] https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt.fyi/issues/411
[5] https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt.fyi/pull/609

P.P.S. Possible regressions in Safari TP:
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev mailing list

webkit-dev mailing list

webkit-dev mailing list

webkit-dev mailing list

Reply via email to