sneak/netwatch
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 2 Pull Requests Actions 8 Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

test/viewport/README.md rewritten sentence by sentence

Browse Source 
What the test does comes first, then the widths, the checks, the
canned network, what it cannot check, the files, and its relation to
the unit tests. The repo's history and issue references are gone;
every sentence is under about 30 words.

Model: fable-5-1
This commit is contained in:
clawbot
2026-10-26 04:00:16 +00:00
committed by clawbot
parent 83a095b572
commit a468b14c1e
1 changed files with 117 additions and 91 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
test/viewport/README.md
+117 -91
View File
@@ -1,114 +1,140 @@
# Responsive-layout harness
# The viewport test
Automated verification of the responsive layout that landed in #5. Run it with:
`make frontend-viewport-test` checks the page's layout at several window widths
in a real browser:
```bash
make frontend-viewport-test
```
It builds `dist/`, serves it from the same digest-pinned `nginx` image and the
same `configs/nginx.conf` the shipping container uses, drives a digest-pinned
headless Chrome against it over CDP, and asserts on computed layout at every
viewport width derived from the app's own CSS. Screenshots land in
`tmp/viewport/` alongside a `results.json`; they are artifacts for a human to
look at when something fails, not the evidence. The assertions are the evidence.
It runs the unit tests, builds the page into `dist/`, and serves it from the
same nginx image, with the same `configs/nginx.conf`, as the Docker image.
Before the browser starts, it checks that `/`, and a path nginx answers with the
page, are served with `Cache-Control: no-cache` and a `Content-Security-Policy`
header. Then it starts a headless Chrome in a container and opens the page in it
at each width. For each width it measures the layout inside the page and checks
the measurements in Node. The checks decide pass or fail. Screenshots and a
`results.json` land in `tmp/viewport/`, for a person to look at when a check
fails.
The target is deliberately outside `make check`: it takes minutes, and
`make test` has to stay under 60 seconds.
The test is not part of `make check`: it needs Docker and takes minutes, and
`make test` has to finish in under 60 seconds.
## How the widths are chosen
## The widths
Not from a list of phone models. `viewports.js` parses the `@media` conditions
out of `web/src/styles.css` and scans `web/src/main.js` and `web/index.html` for
Tailwind responsive prefixes, then tests every breakpoint it finds at one pixel
below it, exactly on it, and one pixel above it. A generic 375px "phone" test
sails straight past an off-by-one at a media query boundary; `max-width: 768px`
matches _at_ 768, and the sweep pins down which side of that line each layout is
on.
The widths come from the page's own CSS. `viewports.js` reads every `min-width`
and `max-width` condition out of the `@media` blocks in `web/src/styles.css`. It
also looks in `web/src/main.js` and `web/index.html` for Tailwind's responsive
class prefixes, such as `md:`, and takes their breakpoints. Each breakpoint is
tested at one pixel below it, exactly on it, and one pixel above it. Today the
CSS has one breakpoint, `max-width: 768px`, and no responsive prefix is used.
Nothing hardcodes 768. Add a second media block or start using `md:` classes and
the new breakpoint is covered without this directory being touched. The app is
desktop-first today (all narrow rules live in `max-width` blocks); a
`min-width`-only, mobile-first set is handled as its inverse, and a set that
mixes the two makes the run fail loudly rather than test the right widths with
the wrong expectation. Four further viewports are fixed anchors, each with a
stated reason: a 320px floor, a 1280px desktop baseline, and two phone-landscape
sizes straddling the breakpoint for the rotation case.
A `max-width: 768px` block matches at 768 pixels. Testing both sides of each
breakpoint catches a layout that switches one pixel too early or too late. A
second media block, or a first `md:` class, is covered without a change to this
directory.
## What it asserts
The page is desktop-first: the wide layout is the default, and every narrow rule
is in a `max-width` block. So a width is expected to show the narrow layout when
one of those blocks matches it. A page with only `min-width` blocks would be
read the other way round. A page that mixes the two kinds fails the run with a
message, because the right expectation for each width can no longer be read from
the breakpoints alone.
- **app-rendered** — enough host rows exist and enough of them show a numeric
latency. This one exists so the rest cannot pass vacuously against a blank
page.
- **no-horizontal-overflow** — `documentElement.scrollWidth` fits the layout
viewport, with the widest offending element named.
- **nothing-past-viewport-edge** — no visible element's box extends past the
viewport edge.
- **no-clipped-text** — nothing hides text behind `overflow: hidden`. Deliberate
ellipsis truncation (Tailwind's `truncate`, used on host names and URLs) is
excluded: it is a design choice, not breakage.
- **tap-targets-44px** — every interactive control is at least 44x44 CSS px on
touch viewports, _and_ each selector in the control list matched at least the
number of visible elements it declares: one of each single control, and one
pin button per WAN host row. The second half is what stops the check passing
vacuously: with size alone, a renamed class would take its controls out of the
measured set and the check would report "all 0 controls are at least 44x44"
and pass. See below.
- **host-rows-stacked / host-rows-side-by-side** — the rows genuinely reflow.
Computed `flex-direction` _and_ the actual geometry are checked, and in the
narrow layout the info block and the sparkline must each occupy essentially
the full row width. A row that merely shrank its 420px column would fail.
- **probing-still-runs / gateway-detection-still-runs** — narrow viewports keep
probing and keep detecting the gateway. The mobile early-return path proposed
in #8 was rejected; this is what would catch it coming back.
Four more widths are fixed, each for a stated reason:
### The tap-target threshold
- 320 by 568 pixels: the narrowest width still in common use
- 667 by 375 pixels: a phone in landscape, inside the narrow layout
- 844 by 390 pixels: a large phone in landscape, in the wide layout but still a
touch device
- 1280 by 800 pixels: a desktop window
44x44 CSS px. That is the figure in Apple's Human Interface Guidelines and in
WCAG 2.2 SC 2.5.5 "Target Size (Enhanced)". WCAG 2.2 SC 2.5.8 (level AA) sets a
lower 24x24 floor, but that floor comes with a spacing exception these controls
do not qualify for — the pin buttons sit directly against the host name they
belong to.
## The checks
## Determinism
Every check runs at every width, and none stops the others.
The browser container runs on an `--internal` docker network and has no route to
the internet, so the app's latency probes cannot reach anything real. The
harness answers them itself from a fixed delay table, with a deterministic
fraction failed outright, so the rows render a realistic spread of one-, two-
and three-digit latencies plus some unreachable rows. That spread is what the
layout has to survive; a `---` placeholder in every row would not exercise it.
- `app-rendered`: at least 10 WAN host rows exist, and at least 5 rows show a
number as their latency. Without this, the other checks could pass against a
blank page.
- `no-horizontal-overflow`: the document is no wider than the window. On a
failure, the widest content is named.
- `nothing-past-viewport-edge`: no visible element extends past the window's
edge.
- `no-clipped-text`: no element hides its text behind `overflow: hidden`. Text
cut with an ellipsis, as Tailwind's `truncate` does on host names and URLs, is
allowed.
- `tap-targets-44px`, on touch widths: every interactive control is at least 44
by 44 CSS pixels. The controls are `#pause-btn`, `#interval-select`,
`#debug-toggle` and the `.pin-btn` in each WAN host row. The check also
demands that each selector matches enough visible elements: one of each single
control, and one pin button per WAN host row. A renamed class would otherwise
take its controls out of the measured set, and the check would pass on
nothing.
- `host-rows-stacked` or `host-rows-side-by-side`: each host row shows the
layout expected at that width. In the narrow layout, the row's
`flex-direction` is `column`, the graph sits below the host's details, and
each takes at least 90% of the row's width. In the wide layout, the direction
is `row` and the graph sits to the right of the details. A row that only
shrank its fixed 420-pixel column fails.
- `probing-still-runs`: the page sent at least one check to a target at this
width.
- `gateway-detection-still-runs`: the `Local Gateway` row is present at this
width, so the gateway was looked for and found.
## What this cannot verify
### The tap-target size
Real limits, so nobody re-parks this issue as needing hardware:
44 by 44 CSS pixels is the figure in Apple's Human Interface Guidelines and in
WCAG 2.2 success criterion 2.5.5, "Target Size (Enhanced)". WCAG 2.2 criterion
2.5.8 sets a lower minimum of 24 by 24 pixels, with an exception that depends on
the space around a control. The pin buttons sit against the host name they
belong to, so the test keeps 44.
- **Non-Chromium engines.** This is Chrome. iOS Safari is WebKit and cannot be
emulated by it; Safari-specific bugs (viewport units under a collapsing URL
bar, `-webkit-fill-available`, form control metrics) will not show up here.
- **Real touch input.** `hasTouch` emulation changes what the page is told, not
how a finger behaves. Gesture handling, scroll momentum, double-tap zoom and
hover-state fallbacks on touch are out of scope.
- **Physical pixel density and rendering.** `deviceScaleFactor` is set, but
subpixel antialiasing, OLED colour rendering and actual legibility at a given
physical size are not measurable here.
- **Fonts.** The container has DejaVu, not the platform's own UI monospace. Text
metrics are therefore close to, but not identical to, a real device — a layout
that fits here by a few pixels might not there.
- **On-device performance.** Canvas sparkline redraw cost, battery, and
behaviour on a slow radio are not measured.
- **Browser chrome.** The address bar, safe-area insets and notch cutouts are
not simulated.
## The browser's network
Everything else this issue was actually about — does the layout reflow, does
anything overflow, is content clipped, are the controls big enough — is a
function of viewport width and CSS, and is covered above.
The browser container runs on an internal Docker network with no route to the
internet, so the page's checks reach no real host. The test answers them itself
from a fixed table of delays: 2, 45, 123, 456 and 780 milliseconds. Which delay
a target gets depends on its URL, and about one target in seven fails outright.
So the rows show one-, two- and three-digit latencies and some unreachable rows,
and the layout is tested against that spread. The request to
`http://192.168.1.1` is answered, so the `Local Gateway` row appears.
On each page, the test sets the interval to 1 second and waits until at least 5
rows show a latency before it measures. The page discards its first round, so
this reaches a filled page without waiting out two rounds at 3 seconds.
## What the test cannot check
- Other browser engines. The test runs Chrome. Safari uses WebKit, and bugs that
only WebKit has do not show up here.
- Real touch input. Touch emulation changes what the page is told, not how a
finger behaves. Gestures, scroll momentum, double-tap zoom and hover states on
touch are not tested.
- Physical pixels. The device pixel ratio is set, but antialiasing, colour
rendering and legibility at a given physical size are not measured.
- Fonts. The container has DejaVu, not a phone's own monospace font. Text is
close to, but not the same width as, text on a real device. A layout that fits
here by a few pixels might not fit there.
- Performance. The cost of redrawing the graphs, battery use and behaviour on a
slow connection are not measured.
- The browser's own frame. The address bar, safe-area insets and notch cutouts
are not simulated.
## The files
- `viewports.js` derives the widths from the sources.
- `facts.js` is run inside the page and measures the layout. It only measures;
it decides nothing.
- `checks.js` turns the measurements into the pass or fail of each check, with
the numbers that decided it.
- `harness.js` connects to the browser, runs each width, writes the screenshots
and `results.json`, and prints the results. `script/frontend-viewport-test`
starts it; every input it needs arrives in the environment.
## Relation to the unit tests
Complementary layers, not two stacks. The unit tests in `test/unit/`, which
`make test` runs with Node's built-in test runner, exercise the functions
`web/src/main.js` exports in-process with no browser. This harness exercises
rendered layout in a real engine and is the only thing here that can see a media
query. Neither replaces the other; assertions about computed styles and element
geometry belong here, assertions about functions belong in `test/unit/`.
The unit tests in `test/unit/`, which `make test` runs with Node's built-in test
runner, call the functions `web/src/main.js` exports, with no browser. This test
runs the built page in a real browser engine and is the only test here that can
see a media query. Checks on computed styles and element geometry belong here;
checks on functions belong in `test/unit/`.