277232 - quirk nowrap + fixed style width does not give style width as MEW

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Core :: Layout: Tables, defect)

Description

[drew]

Example:

<table width="500px" border="1">
    <tr>
        <td style="width: 300px;">test 1</td>
        <td width="100%">test2</td>
    </tr>
</table>

<table width="500px" border="1">
    <tr>
        <td style="width: 300px;">test 3</td>
        <td>test4</td>
    </tr>
</table>

In the first table, the first cell should take up the 300px it specified, and
the second cell should take up 100% of the remaining width of the container.

Comment 1

[Bernd]

>In the first table, the first cell should take up the 300px it specified, and
the second cell should take up 100% of the remaining width of the container.

and this is specified where that it should do this? Especially how does that fit
with http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/tables.html#width-layout?

Comment 2

[drew]

From the section you linked:

"If the specified 'width' (W) of the cell is greater than MCW, W is the minimum
cell width."

And:

"A percentage value for a column width is relative to the table width. If the
table has 'width: auto', a percentage represents a constraint on the column's
width, which a UA should try to satisfy. (Obviously, this is not always
possible: if the column's width is '110%', the constraint cannot be satisfied.)"

I interpret this to mean that in the sample I gave the specified 'width' should
be the minimum cell width.  The specifiction of 100% "cannot be satisfied."

The spec seems ambiguous, in that the second passage I quoted uses the term
"constraint" without specifying that it is constraining the maximum, not the
minimum.  I believe the intent of the spec is to constrain the maximum.

Comment 3

[Bernd]

Ah I overlooked that the cells are in the same row.
The cell width specification is not correct in the first case, so the browser
goes into its fixup code (the GIGO principle, garbage in - garbage out). And we
can do whatever we want as this is not covered by any spec that I know. We
render this identical to IE and Opera, which have followed the NN.

Comment 4

[drew]

Why is the first width specificatin not correct?  If it is not correct in the
first case it shouldn't have been applied correctly in the second.  The only
difference between the two cases is that the first has a non-css width specifier
on the second cell.  

Comment 5

[drew]

The example I posted at first didn't properly demonstrate the problem.  I was
given a better example:

http://dkime.com/dochope.html

This is taken from the PayPal shopping cart application.  Go to
http://dochope.com and click the "View Cart" to see the original.  The link
above is the simplified test case.

In the new example:

* The first table uses a style for pixel width in the first cell and html for
percent width in the second

* The second table uses html for pixel width in the first cell and html for
percent width in the second

* The third table uses a style for pixel width in the first cell and a style for
percent width in the second

The second table is the only one that displays as you would expect.

I wouldn't reopen this bug, except that the PayPal code is out of my control,
and it gets thousands of unique visitors a day -- not just my site, everyone
using PayPal shopping cart.

Comment 6

[Bernd]

Attachment: reduced testcase

Comment 7

[Bernd]

Attachment: more obvious testcase

Comment 8

[Bernd]

Thats the ugly nowrap fixed width quirk hack, and we dont apply that hack for
style widths but we do it for html widths

Comment 9

[Bernd]

the code at
http://lxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/source/layout/tables/nsTableCellFrame.cpp#230
interacts with 
http://lxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/source/content/html/content/src/nsHTMLTableCellElement.cpp#399

Comment 10

[Bernd]

Drew you are relying on illegal behaviour here. Its an error that origined from
NN but has nothing to do with a spec. So this if ever will only work in quirks
mode (http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/quirks/)

Comment 11

[drew]

I wish I were the one relying on that behavior.  As I said, this is the PayPal
shopping cart page.  Is there any process that seems to work for requesting
someone fix their code to standards?

Comment 12

[Bernd]

Attachment: patch

Comment 13

[Bernd]

This patch should first of all make the nowrap thing a quirk.
Second it should increase the min table cell width to a fixed width if nowrap in
specified. IE resets the nowrap attribute regardless how the fixed width has
been specified via html or the style system. This patch resets the nowrap only
for the html width but increases the table cell width. This should also help in
couple of those img. wrap scenarios.

Comment 14

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

Comment on attachment 170731 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

So what is the quirk?  That in quirks mode table cells with fixed HTML width
set don't have the "nowrap" attribute apply to actually prohibit wrapping?  And
that table cells with the nowrap attribute set and a width specified behave
weirdly?

If that's correct, r+sr=bzbarsky...

Comment 15

[Bernd]

fix checked in

Comment 16

[Martijn Wargers (dead)]

*** Bug 323310 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***