Fixes#1745
Should I adjust the expected result of the corresponding wpt test cases?
html/dom/documents/dom-tree-accessors/document.getElementsByName/document.getElementsByName-namespace.html
html/dom/documents/dom-tree-accessors/document.getElementsByName/document.getElementsByName-namespace.xhtml
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.png" height=40 alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/6231)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
fixes#5232
The correct styling shows up in the Firefox devtools (e.g. a caution symbol beside warning messages.)
I couldn't quickly find the corresponding Firefox code that handles log-levels so the values I'm sending are "guesses" (but they work seem to work.) I'll look today because I'm sending "log" for Debug-level, Error for failed asserts etc.
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.png" height=40 alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/6193)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
This implements the `canvas`, `drawingBufferHeight` and
`drawingBufferWidth` getters to `WebGLRenderingContext`, and an initial
version of `getParameter`.
r? @jdm
I couldn't add the `getContextAttributes` method since `CodegenRust`
doesn't know how to return a dictionary value, I'll take a look at it ASAP.
I think the helper functions can return directly the renderer, since they're used just for that, but I wanted to hear your opinions about this.
By the way I'm interested in adding more serious tests for WebGL, and I think the [khronos conformance suit](https://github.com/KhronosGroup/WebGL/tree/master/conformance-suites/1.0.3) should be the best option.
Should I try to integrate it in wpt, or making a `tests/webgl` directory (or similar) inside the servo tree? (Maybe this question should be for @Ms2ger)
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.png" height=40 alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/6183)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
I've done a bit of job to get this done. Right now readback is still used, but we have a `LayerId` -> `CanvasRenderer` map on the paint task, that we can use to get rid of that.
I'd want review, to see if this is a good approach (I know it's not the initial `CanvasId` -> renderer approach, but it's pretty similar, since a canvas involves a `PaintLayer`).
I had to do a bit of refactoring to avoid cyclic dependencies between canvas and gfx. I'd want you to review them too.
It's mergeable and doesn't break any tests :P
Some of my main concerns:
* Does the canvas render really need to be behind an `Arc<Mutex<T>>`?
* I can't clone a `NativeSurface` right now (that's why the `SendNativeSurface()` msg is unimplemented in the WebGL task). It should be easy to add that to rust-layers, supposing the caller is responsible to mark it as non-leaking, any reason to not do it?
cc @jdm @pcwalton
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.png" height=40 alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/6083)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
Added support for the tabindex field, also added its correct defaults (-2 TODOs for things not supported in Servo yet). Also added tabindex logic into Element::is_focusable_area.
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.png" height=40 alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/5858)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
