Bug 4303 - We need some good SVGs for layout testing
Summary: We need some good SVGs for layout testing
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: WebKit
Classification: Unclassified
Component: SVG (show other bugs)
Version: 420+
Hardware: Mac OS X 10.4
: P4 Normal
Assignee: Eric Seidel (no email)
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-08-06 12:09 PDT by Eric Seidel (no email)
Modified: 2005-08-07 13:34 PDT (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments
I've added the W3C SVG 1.1 Test Suite as a start (part 1) (769.20 KB, patch)
2005-08-07 02:28 PDT, Eric Seidel (no email)
darin: review+
Details | Formatted Diff | Diff
part 2 (870.32 KB, patch)
2005-08-07 02:29 PDT, Eric Seidel (no email)
no flags Details | Formatted Diff | Diff
part 3 (555.09 KB, patch)
2005-08-07 02:31 PDT, Eric Seidel (no email)
no flags Details | Formatted Diff | Diff
part 4 (497.19 KB, patch)
2005-08-07 02:32 PDT, Eric Seidel (no email)
no flags Details | Formatted Diff | Diff
Improvements in KCanvas debugging render tree dump logic. (5.02 KB, patch)
2005-08-07 02:39 PDT, Eric Seidel (no email)
darin: review+
Details | Formatted Diff | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Eric Seidel (no email) 2005-08-06 12:09:28 PDT
We need some good SVGs for layout testing

Now that http://bugzilla.opendarwin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 finally landed, we have a 
DumpRenderTree-like testing infrastructure for SVGs.  Now we just need some SVGs to take advantage 
of this architecture.

Throw SVG files in SVGSupport/layout-tests/ and run the script.

It's important that we be allowed to distribute any SVGs we add to CVS.
http://www.openclipart.org/  would be a good place to start looking.
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/Test/ is likely also useable, but we'd have to check the license 
conditions.
Comment 1 Eric Seidel (no email) 2005-08-07 02:28:51 PDT
Created attachment 3255 [details]
I've added the W3C SVG 1.1 Test Suite as a start (part 1)
Comment 2 Eric Seidel (no email) 2005-08-07 02:29:42 PDT
Created attachment 3256 [details]
part 2
Comment 3 Eric Seidel (no email) 2005-08-07 02:31:29 PDT
Created attachment 3257 [details]
part 3
Comment 4 Eric Seidel (no email) 2005-08-07 02:32:00 PDT
Created attachment 3258 [details]
part 4
Comment 5 Eric Seidel (no email) 2005-08-07 02:35:41 PDT
Comment on attachment 3255 [details]
I've added the W3C SVG 1.1 Test Suite as a start (part 1)

There are 4 parts to this 2.7MB patch... I'm only marking the first one for
review.  As you can see from the KCanvasRenderTree output, there is still much
refinement to be done.	But this is a *huge* step in the right direction, and
one I think is worth landing.  Further notes, this patch was made from within
SVGSupport/layout-tests.  This patch also requires some additional fixes to
kcanvas for improved dump logic (in a separate bug).  Finally, these are
basically just the stock W3C SVG Test Suite files, except I've reorganized a
bit.  ./svg/ was collapsed to the top level.  ./images/ was renamed Resources,
and all .svg files had "../images" replaced with "Resources".  finally all of
./png/full-*.png was moved to *-w3c.png, and all of ./png/basic-*.png was
removed.  A few of the SVGs were crashing WebCore+SVG, those were moved from
.svg to .svg-disabled.	That's it!
Comment 6 Eric Seidel (no email) 2005-08-07 02:39:24 PDT
Created attachment 3259 [details]
Improvements in KCanvas debugging render tree dump logic.
Comment 7 Eric Seidel (no email) 2005-08-07 02:40:47 PDT
Comment on attachment 3259 [details]
Improvements in KCanvas debugging render tree dump logic.

These are the improvements required for better render tree dumps, as noted in
my earlier W3C attachment.
Comment 8 Darin Adler 2005-08-07 10:01:33 PDT
Comment on attachment 3255 [details]
I've added the W3C SVG 1.1 Test Suite as a start (part 1)

This stuff doesn't need review given the development stage it's at.
Comment 9 Darin Adler 2005-08-07 10:02:00 PDT
Comment on attachment 3259 [details]
Improvements in KCanvas debugging render tree dump logic.

This stuff doesn't need review given the development stage it's at.