[webkit-qt] About the fonts used for QtWebKit tests

Kenneth Rohde Christiansen kenneth.christiansen at gmail.com
Tue May 29 15:43:42 PDT 2012

To question (2) Liberation font, I think it is a good idea to make the
switch. But should we do that before the other fix? or does it make
more sense to do both together?

For question 1 I think we need to skip them first and then
crowd-source the unskipping, because otherwise we have no clue whether
the change actually starts showing other - before hidden - bugs.


On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:32 PM, Caio Marcelo de Oliveira Filho
<caio.oliveira at openbossa.org> wrote:
> Hello folks,
> Disclaimer: I'm not a font expert, I just want to make an editing
> layout test to pass in Qt port, and it happens to depend on monospace
> fonts. :]
> Last week I've hacked a bit our font infrastructure in testing. I've
> found out that the current state is not good: we have two odd
> configuration files with a lot of indirection and unused information,
> and we also have with problems like not getting monospace font when
> tests asks for those fonts. This naturally cause some tests that
> depend the fixed size of the characters to fail, for example
> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50144.
> After talking to elproxy and bbandix, I made a new configuration file
> (and corresponding changes for QtWebKit), tested by me in Qt 4.8, 5.0
> and 5.0-wk2 and also some tests by bbandix, that seems to do the right
> thing. The patches are here
> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85203 for you guys to take a
> look and review.
> The problem is: this change means we need to do a big rebaseline of
> ~5000 tests (also listed in the previous patch). Not only monospace
> fonts changed but also some fonts that previously were wrongly
> assigned to our sans-serif, are now properly assigned to our serif
> font. Note that even though we have some pixel tests, not all of them
> matches the actual results even without the patch.
> Brings me to question
> 1) How we handle such a big rebaseline? How you guys did before?
> - One person do it in a big rebaseline (I'm not very enthusiastic with
> this approach, although the rebasilne server tool seems very good).
> - Skip all those tests (in a separated section in the Skipped file)
> and "crowdsource" the work of rebaselining.
> - Another way?
> And since we are doing this rebaseline, another question...
> 2) Given that we have a huge rebaseline ahead, what about changing our
> Nimbus family of fonts to the Liberation family of fonts
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_fonts). I see two benefits:
> - They share the metrics with the Arial/TimesNewRoman/CourierNew
> fonts, so we could _potentially_ share some expected results with
> other ports.
> - And even if we don't, the results at least will look similar, making
> our and other port developer life easier when assessing a patch and
> doing a rebaseline.
> Note that these fonts are not to be distributed with Qt, just used by
> developers and robots. We can keep our version of them in
> testfonts.git.
> Long story short:
> (1) How we do this rebaseline?
> (2) Let's use the opportunity to migrate to Liberation family?
> Cheers,
> --
> Caio Marcelo de Oliveira Filho
> openBossa @ INdT - Instituto Nokia de Tecnologia
> _______________________________________________
> webkit-qt mailing list
> webkit-qt at lists.webkit.org
> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-qt

Kenneth Rohde Christiansen
Senior Engineer
Nokia Mobile Phones, Browser / WebKit team
Phone  +45 4093 0598 / E-mail kenneth at webkit.org

http://codeposts.blogspot.com ﹆﹆﹆

More information about the webkit-qt mailing list