animate-elem-20-t

97.3% of the ink matches

pass - measured over 91018 pixels carrying ink in either image.

These results are not meaningful. This check renders a single static frame, and nothing in a test document records which moment in time its reference image was captured at - so a correct SMIL implementation and a broken one are equally likely to mismatch. Animation behaviour is covered by dedicated unit tests instead; see ctgnz/foxglove#208 for a real measurement methodology, still to be worked out.

W3C reference (context only, see #200)

Foxglove

Difference

In the difference panel, red marks pixels that differ beyond tolerance and grey marks matching content. The tinted band, where present, is the <text id="revision"> legend every test carries: it renders in a fallback font this library cannot match, so it is excluded from the comparison entirely rather than failing every test.

What this test checks

The test is passed if: The first time "fade in" is clicked, a blue rectangle should smoothly fade from white to blue over the course of three seconds. When "fade out" is clicked, the blue rectangle should smoothly fade from blue to white over the course of three seconds. When "fade in" is clicked the second time, the blue rectangle should smoothly fade from white to blue over the course of three seconds, and then directly fade out from blue to white over the course of three seconds. The rendered picture matches the reference image, (except for possible variations in the labeling text (per CSS2 rules)) after activating the link on the fade-in button the first time and waiting three seconds for the animation to complete. The picture should remain looking the same way indefinitely, until another link is activated.

View the source document at W3C