Closed
Bug 291222
Opened 19 years ago
Closed 19 years ago
Abs. pos. span in document order affect rendering
Categories
(Core :: Web Painting, defect)
Tracking
()
VERIFIED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: bugzilla, Assigned: roc)
References
()
Details
(Keywords: regression, testcase, Whiteboard: CSS2 9.9.1)
Attachments
(3 files)
4.17 KB,
text/html
|
Details | |
436 bytes,
text/html
|
Details | |
1.43 KB,
patch
|
bzbarsky
:
review+
bzbarsky
:
superreview+
asa
:
approval1.8b2+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
Depending on the place where abs. pos. <span>s are located in a DHTML layer (abs. pos. <div>), they will or will not be rendered. I believe this is a recent regression. I've been working on doing webpages on DHTML object model properties and just recently noticed that the words "border-top" and "border-bottom" were not visible. Steps to reproduce: 1- Load the URL Actual results in Mozilla 1.8b2 build 2005042005: the words "border-top" and "border-bottom" are NOT readable, are NOT viewable, are NOT highlightable/selectable; these words are with white color on black background. These "border-top" and "border-bottom" words are abs. pos. <span> positioned on the thick black border of a <div>. Expected results: the words "border-top" and "border-bottom" should be readable, should be viewable, should be highlightable/selectable; these words are with white color on black background, abs. pos. on the thick black borders. I get the expected results with Opera 8.0 final release build 7561, with Firefox 1.0.3 rv 1.7.7 build 20050414 and with MSIE 6 SV1. Reproducible: always XP Pro SP2 here. Testcase (not minimized though) coming
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•19 years ago
|
||
Instructions: Load this not-perfectly-reduced testcase. In the top block box (id="FirstContainer"), you will NOT see the white words "border-top" and "border-bottom". In the bottom block box (id="SecondContainer"), you will see the white words "border-top" and "border-bottom". The only significant, relevant difference between the 2 block boxes is the place where the abs. pos. <span>s are located, appear in the document order. I guess it could be possible to create a more reduced testcase. What I do not understand at all in that testcase is how come "margin-top" and "margin-bottom" are viewable, readable, selectable/highlightable in both container blocks: I have "played" around with the code, checked DOM inspector, etc. and I can not understand this.
Comment 2•19 years ago
|
||
This is somewhat more minimal. The testcase works with 2005-04-03 trunk build, fails in 2005-04-04 trunk build: http://bonsai.mozilla.org/cvsquery.cgi?treeid=default&module=all&branch=HEAD&branchtype=match&dir=&file=&filetype=match&who=&whotype=match&sortby=Date&hours=2&date=explicit&mindate=2005-04-03+06%3A00%3A00&maxdate=2005-04-04+09%3A00%3A00&cvsroot=%2Fcvsroot
Updated•19 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → roc
Component: Layout: R & A Pos → Layout: View Rendering
QA Contact: layout.r-and-a-pos → ian
Comment 3•19 years ago
|
||
By the way, in builds before this regression occured I cannot select the text in the green block with testcase2 (happens even with Mozilla1.7).
Comment 4•19 years ago
|
||
If I use z-index, I can get the spanned text visible. Testcase 1, border top: > 0 makes it visible, 0 hides it. z-index: 1;">border-top</span> testcase 1, second example, inserting z-index 1 hides it, 0 makes it visible. #DivNestedInSecondContainer { z-index: 1;
Comment 5•19 years ago
|
||
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.8b2) Gecko/20050417 Testcase 1 regressed between BuildID 2005041719 (working) and 2005041806 http://bonsai.mozilla.org/cvsquery.cgi?treeid=default&module=SeaMonkeyAll&branch=HEAD&branchtype=match&dir=&file=&filetype=match&who=&whotype=match&sortby=Date&hours=2&date=explicit&mindate=2005-04-17+00%3A00&maxdate=2005-04-18+07%3A00&cvsroot=%2Fcvsroot
Reporter | ||
Comment 6•19 years ago
|
||
attachment 181358 [details] renders the white colored "border-top" and "border-bottom" in both <div>s in NS 6.1 (rv: 0.9.2), in NS 6.2 (rv:0.9.4), in NS 7.0 (rv: 1.0.1), NS 7.1 (rv: 1.4), NS 7.2 (rv: 1.7.2), Firefox 1.0.3, Opera 8.0 final build 7561, MSIE 6 SV1 but not in Safari 1.2.4 v 125.12. Safari 1.2.4 and Mozilla 1.8b2 build 2005042005 renders that testcase identically. Per se, such browser petition does not mean much: it does not prove that there is a bug or not. But for the edition of DHTML property pages in Gecko DOM reference, it means the 2nd (bottom) div is more consistently rendered across web standards compliant browsers. I will leave the page of the URL (clientHeight.html) as it is but I will change all other similar+related DHTML pages to use the code of the 2nd div. I read carefully http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visuren.html#propdef-z-index and I believe there is a bug with current Mozilla nightly build... although I would prefer someone more knowledgeable in this area to confirm all this.
Whiteboard: CSS2 9.9.1
Comment 7•19 years ago
|
||
This looks like a pretty serious z-ordering regression (from the scrollframe landing?)
Flags: blocking1.8b2?
OS: Windows XP → All
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•19 years ago
|
||
I can't remember if it's you or David who's familiar with the sorting code. In any case, this is an easy one. If we're going to update the display elements' "topmost" bits because the parent view is topmost and we want to inherit its topmost-ness into the children, first sort the display elements taking into account their current topmost-ness so that their relative ordering is not lost.
Attachment #181803 -
Flags: superreview?(bzbarsky)
Attachment #181803 -
Flags: review?(bzbarsky)
Comment 9•19 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 181803 [details] [diff] [review] fix I think David's the one who knows this code, but you're right that this is straightforward.
Attachment #181803 -
Flags: superreview?(bzbarsky)
Attachment #181803 -
Flags: superreview+
Attachment #181803 -
Flags: review?(bzbarsky)
Attachment #181803 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•19 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 181803 [details] [diff] [review] fix Fixes a z-ordering regression
Attachment #181803 -
Flags: approval1.8b2?
Comment 11•19 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 181803 [details] [diff] [review] fix a=asa
Attachment #181803 -
Flags: approval1.8b2? → approval1.8b2+
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•19 years ago
|
||
checked in
Assignee | ||
Comment 13•19 years ago
|
||
actually marking fixed
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 19 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Reporter | ||
Comment 14•19 years ago
|
||
I VERIFIED the provided url and both testcases with Mozilla 1.8b2 build 2005042606 and marking as such.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Updated•19 years ago
|
Flags: blocking1.8b2?
Updated•6 years ago
|
Component: Layout: View Rendering → Layout: Web Painting
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•