Update css/css-[a-p]* from monorail results

[stephenmcgruer]

See #798 for the methodology

[foolip]

@schenney-chromium would you be able to review this? I started having a go, but I reckon with your experience triaging rendering bugs, you could tell much quicker which bugs are relevant and not.

@stephenmcgruer I think having the bug titles available when reviewing, or even just clickable URLs, would speed up reviewing this. If the script that produced this could be tweaked with a one-liner to print that, that would be helpful. Otherwise I can pass this through a terrible script I made to get the titles.

[stephenmcgruer]

@stephenmcgruer I think having the bug titles available when reviewing, or even just clickable URLs, would speed up reviewing this. If the script that produced this could be tweaked with a one-liner to print that, that would be helpful. Otherwise I can pass this through a terrible script I made to get the titles.

bug-titles.txt (faux-CSV file; split on the first ',' only).

Also as a spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AJFl3gLfVFjOXRAir9g2BsesdF3fGp9LJHnDtWQLW-c/edit#gid=0

Can't really make the URLs clickable in GitHub's review UI, afraid I don't have that power ;)

[stephenmcgruer]

@schenney-chromium would you be able to review this? I started having a go, but I reckon with your experience triaging rendering bugs, you could tell much quicker which bugs are relevant and not.

For a reference, foolip@ has already reviewed #800, #801, and #802 (might be useful to see how he approaches it)

[foolip]

What I did was basically to open each URL and search for the bug name, to see in what way it was mentioned. If it was mentioned together with a mix of lots of other tests it's less likely that the bug is relevant.

[stephenmcgruer]

Ping!

[foolip]

Hmm, maybe I should just review this. @stephenmcgruer can you resolve conflicts? (I'm OOO next week, so doing it the Monday after would be good.)

[stephenmcgruer]

@foolip - rebased, PTAL. Found a half dozen cases whilst rebasing where a human has since added the same expectations as the script had (exactly the same, which is nice I guess)

[foolip]

I've spot checked ~5 of the bugs and they all look good.