Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

What does the spine have to do with confreq-rs-foreign_image? #72

Closed
dlazin opened this issue Nov 5, 2021 · 3 comments
Closed

What does the spine have to do with confreq-rs-foreign_image? #72

dlazin opened this issue Nov 5, 2021 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
propose closing question Further information is requested

Comments

@dlazin
Copy link
Collaborator

dlazin commented Nov 5, 2021

The description for https://w3c.github.io/epub-tests/#confreq-rs-foreign_image is:

An HTML content file contains a PSD image, with a manifest fallback to a PNG image. This tests fallbacks for resources that are not in the spine.

The first half makes sense as a test for https://w3c.github.io/epub-specs/epub33/rs/#confreq-rs-foreign, but I don't understand how the spine is involved. Is the spine part irrelevant, or, if not, should this perhaps be two separate tests (image fallback and resource-not-in-spine fallbacks)?

See https://github.com/w3c/epub-tests/blob/main/tests/confreq-rs-foreign_image/OPS/package.opf for a refresher of what this test is actually doing :)

@dauwhe
Copy link
Contributor

dauwhe commented Nov 5, 2021

The fallback mechanism works in two situations: one is for putting non-CMT resources in the spine, and then falling back to those. The other is providing fallbacks for non-CMT resources that are embedded in regular EPUB content documents. This test is for the latter situation. I expect the code paths for these in reading systems would be really different, if in fact any reading system did this.

@dlazin dlazin added test question question Further information is requested and removed test question labels Nov 13, 2021
@iherman
Copy link
Member

iherman commented Mar 20, 2025

@dlazin is it o.k. to close this issue?

@dlazin
Copy link
Collaborator Author

dlazin commented Mar 20, 2025

Yes, it's OK to close; I will do so. Ideally we would change the test to clarify for future readers, but this bug holds the record for now.

@dlazin dlazin closed this as completed Mar 20, 2025
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from In review to Done in PM/EPUB issues Mar 20, 2025
@iherman iherman removed this from PM/EPUB issues Mar 20, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
propose closing question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants