Bug 45633 - [Chromium][DRT] Spellcheck doesn't work except for Mac DRT.
Summary: [Chromium][DRT] Spellcheck doesn't work except for Mac DRT.
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: WebKit
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Tools / Tests (show other bugs)
Version: 528+ (Nightly build)
Hardware: PC OS X 10.5
: P2 Normal
Assignee: Nobody
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-09-12 22:05 PDT by Hajime Morrita
Modified: 2011-05-11 04:18 PDT (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Hajime Morrita 2010-09-12 22:05:46 PDT
Current Chromium DRT does not run a spellcheck except for Mac
and spellcheck-related tests are not usable. (See WebViewHost::spellCheck() for detail.)

Mac DRT uses MockSpellCheker class to do that check.
So using it would on Windows and Linux looks fine in general.
But there are concerns:

- A: If we simply enable MockSpellChecker on Windows/Linux, many pixel expectations under editing/* will get broken and massive rebaselinining will be required.
- B: If we add an API to DRT that enables/disables spellchecking, such rebaselining could be avoided. But porting such API to other ports will need hassle.

Any thoughts?
At this time I think A is preferable but its landing need care.
Your feedbacks and ideas are appreciated!
Comment 1 Kent Tamura 2010-09-13 00:46:01 PDT
(In reply to comment #0)
> - A: If we simply enable MockSpellChecker on Windows/Linux, many pixel expectations under editing/* will get broken and massive rebaselinining will be required.

How many tests will be affected?  Can we reduce the number by dumpAsText()/dump-as-markup.js conversion?
Comment 2 Hajime Morrita 2010-09-13 01:20:49 PDT
> How many tests will be affected?  Can we reduce the number by dumpAsText()/dump-as-markup.js conversion?

We have about 700 png files under LayoutTests/platform/chromium-win/editing/ now.
I'm not sure which fraction of them contains a ill-spelled word... I can run a experiment though.
On converting them to dump-as-markup, it will be definitely helpful. 
It is longer way than rebaselining, though.

BTW, it might be worth to have something like a "textify task force"
as a part of our editing improvement effort because
most of editing test can be converted to the text-style, I guess.
Comment 3 Tony Chang 2010-09-13 08:27:39 PDT
I vote for A if it's not too hard.  I think you can use the layout test try bots to see how many tests would need to be rebaselined.
Comment 4 Hironori Bono 2010-09-13 18:59:10 PDT
Morita-san,

Even though I'm not a WebKit guru, I think the option A may need rebaselines every time when we chage the spell-checking code of WebKit. I'm not sure whether it is acceptable.

Regards,

Hironori Bono
Comment 5 Hajime Morrita 2010-09-13 19:18:28 PDT
> Even though I'm not a WebKit guru, I think the option A may need rebaselines every time when we chage the spell-checking code of WebKit. I'm not sure whether it is acceptable.
Good point. This is what I encountered when landing http://webkit.org/b/41423.
as Kent-san mentioned,
- C: turning editing tests into dump-as-markup
becomes more appealing now.
Comment 6 Kent Tamura 2011-05-11 04:18:38 PDT
I think this was resolved some months ago.