This test doesn't seem to match its assertion. The class 'flip' doesn't seem to be adding anything.
Tom Clancy, 2008/07/24 08:19
Removed the 'flip' class. This was originally one test, split into 3 on Elika's advice:
“Test 002 is really two tests, one for 'auto' and one for '180deg'; I'd split it into two files. I'd also throw in a test for 450deg.”
Keep or remove?
Melinda Grant, 2008/08/28 15:13
Hmmm, I don't follow Elika's comments, relative to an assertion that the initial value is 0deg.
I think you need to do one image with no 'image-orientation' property (like you have for -a), then add the same image where 'image-orientation' has been set to '0', and declare that they are the same. Then throw in another image with a different 'image-orientation' to show that a different value produces a different effect.
I would modify -a and lose -b and -c. I assume there's another test that tests 90deg, 180deg, 270deg, and a modulo. If not, we should add one.
You could leave a comment if you were logged in.
test/css2.1/submit/88.txt · Last modified: 2014/12/09 15:48 by 127.0.0.1
Discussion
This test doesn't seem to match its assertion. The class 'flip' doesn't seem to be adding anything.
Removed the 'flip' class. This was originally one test, split into 3 on Elika's advice:
“Test 002 is really two tests, one for 'auto' and one for '180deg'; I'd split it into two files. I'd also throw in a test for 450deg.”
Keep or remove?
Hmmm, I don't follow Elika's comments, relative to an assertion that the initial value is 0deg.
I think you need to do one image with no 'image-orientation' property (like you have for -a), then add the same image where 'image-orientation' has been set to '0', and declare that they are the same. Then throw in another image with a different 'image-orientation' to show that a different value produces a different effect.
I would modify -a and lose -b and -c. I assume there's another test that tests 90deg, 180deg, 270deg, and a modulo. If not, we should add one.