QA/Firefox3.1/FontFace TestStatus: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

QA/Firefox3.1/FontFace TestStatus (view source)

Revision as of 22:43, 12 September 2008

1,086 bytes added , 12 September 2008

→‎Tests on Windows XP SP3

Ayoshihara

193

edits

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 These tests were executed after applying '''patchv.0.9h''' from [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=441473 bug441473]
-Tests marked with star (*) shows that some unexpected features were found. See [[QA/Firefox3.1/FontFace_TestStatus#Possible_Risks| Possible Risks]] section for details.
 == Tests on Mac OS X ==
@@ Line 96: / Line 94: @@
 |}
-LoadTest (done on patch v.0.9d ... not on patch v.0.9h yet)
+LoadTest (stress test)
-* even 100 @font-face rules per page seems to be pretty scalable. When 210 (230 for the first page you load) or more @font-face rules are used in a document, firefox will crash.
+* even 100 @font-face rules per page seems to be pretty scalable. A web page with 200 @font-face rules will be loaded in around 5 seconds. When 250 or more @font-face rules are used in a document, firefox will crash.
 == Tests on Windows XP SP3 ==
@@ Line 195: / Line 193: @@
 |}
-LoadTest (done with patch v.0.9d, not with patch v.0.9h yet)
+LoadTest (stress test)
-* 20 @font-face rules per page is pretty scalable. When you scroll the page or do some action during the downloading and rendering of a font, rendering will take a lot more time. So if more than 50 @font-face rules are used, it would take too much time for a user to wait (nearly 10 seconds, but not measured)
+* On Windows, it seems even more scalable. A web page with 100 @font-face rules will be loaded in around 1 second. But when more than 150 @font-face rules are used in a single page, it takes much more time to load. A web page with 200 @font-face rules will be loaded in around 20 seconds, which is a lot more than that on Mac.
 * It does not crash even if a page had more than 1000 @font-face rules, but it would take more than 5 minutes until the text is rendered, which is not endurable for general use.
-** The more @font-face rules you have in a page, the more time is needed to its rendering. It seems that the time it takes is O(n^2) or something
 = Planned (but not executed) Tests =
 (Tests Not Executed Yet)
+== Unicode-Range Tests ==
+* Basic Tests
+** single code point
+*** ex. U+A5, U+301C
+** interval value
+*** ex. U+3040-30FF, U+999-998 (does this fail?)
+* What happens if I put many 0s before the number?
+** ex. U+F, U+0F, U+00F, U+000F, U+00000000F, ... do they mean the same thing?
+* What happens if I use ? in the front/middle?
+** ex. U+?4, U+3?5, ...
+* What happens if I use multiple unicode-range rules to consist a single font-family?
+** ex. @font-face{ font-family:testA; src:url(fontA.ttf); unicode-range:U+0-U+2FF; } @font-face{ font-family:testA; src:url(fontB.otf); unicode-range:U+300-U+FFF }
+* What happens if I specified only a single character in the rule and tried to display other character? Would there be a fallback function?
+** ex. @font-face { font-family:smallA; src:url(smallA.ttf); unicode-range:U+1; }
+** &lt;span class="font-family:smallA"&gt;ABC&lt;/span&gt;?
+* What happens if the specified font did not have a character of the specified unicode range? Does it display nothing? Would there be a fallback function?
+== CSS Mutation from JavaScript tests ==
+* What happens if you download the same font again? Would it use cache?
+* Is it possible to change the DOM tree of other documents?
+** Is downloading another font for other documents prohibited? or is it allowed?
+* Consider what will happen when 2 pages try to change the DOM of each other
+** stateful
 = Possible Risks =
@@ Line 284: / Line 307: @@
 ** <strike>As a consequence, the possibility of download failure increased</strike>
 ** <strike>Unfortunately, I didn't take any statistics, so I can't compare them by exact numbers</strike>
+They were fixed in patch v.0.9h :-)
 == Suspected Features ==