219417 - optgroup doesn't display label with CSS :before pseudo-element content

Status: RESOLVED INVALID

(Core :: Layout: Form Controls, defect)

Description

[Guy McArthur]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030916
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030916

Using the CSS :before pseudo-element to insert some content before an optgroup
element causes the label to not be displayed.

E.g. 
optgroup:before { content: " [+] "; }

The content can be text or an image from a url.
Presumably, this is a problem with :after also, though I haven't tried that.

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:




Expected Results:  
Display label after psuedo-element content.

Comment 1

[David Baron :dbaron: (⌚️UTC-4, no longer working on Mozilla)]

-> form controls

Comment 2

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

jkeiser, where exactly do we get the optgroup labels.

Comment 3

[Guy McArthur]

Just a note, still present in 1.7rc1.

Comment 4

[Guy McArthur]

Attachment: testcase for optgroup css3 content bug

Here is a testcase.

Comment 5

[Anne (:annevk)]

Ok, as it seems Mozilla implementd OPTGROUP as:

  optgroup[label]::before{
   content:attr(label);
  }

You overwrite that and obviously, it won't display the text anymore. So until
bug 215083 is fixed, we will have this problem.

Once it is fixed however, OPTGROUP becomes "some kind of" replaced element and
both '::before' and '::after' won't apply anymore, since they are children of
the element.

So, in the end, this would be INVALID I assume.

Comment 6

[Justin Wood (:Callek)]

duping just to ensure that the bug when fixed marks this as fixed if this is
still open.



*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 215083 ***

Comment 7

[Justin Wood (:Callek)]

Marking re-opened now: since the problem is very real, we should allow real
*content* to sink through on a :before ::before of the element.

The fact that we do it the way we currently do as a quick "hey it works" thing
is not enough to mark invalid, imo.

It may be possible to code a `hack` (as much as I hate them) to fix this bug
before the dupe is fixed, if someone wants to, its `Open` for it, otherwise, the
bug I had duped of, is a good solution.

Comment 8

[Justin Wood (:Callek)]

correctly moving to new, grr ;-)

Comment 9

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

So...  I'm with comment 5 here.  Not a bug.