357086 - multi frame link, always links to top of current frame, instead of correct target frame, if the frame was scrolled before

Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME

(Firefox :: General, defect)

Description

[Volker Schmidt]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.8.1) Gecko/20061010 Firefox/2.0
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.8.1) Gecko/20061010 Firefox/2.0

in a multi frame local file (e.g. framed java documenation, "file:///C:/Programme/Java/docs/api/index.html" ), when clicking on a frame link, sometimes firefox 2.0 first jumps to the top of the current frame, instead of the target in an other frame. Second try, it always works!
Assumtion, that there is a caching problem.

Reproducible: Sometimes

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Open local java documentation
2. Click on a package selection
3. The link is headed to the top of the current frame, instead of the target frame
4. go down again, pressing the same package ( works! )

Effect is quite random, but happens at least 3 times a day.

Actual Results:  
click lead to top of current frame

Expected Results:  
click should update an other frame

Comment 1

[Volker Schmidt]

Now have a way to reproduce it:

1) Open: http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/api/
2) Scroll down the upperleft frame (JavaTM 2 Platform ... )
3) Click on one of the packages down there
4) Instead of updating the frame below, the current frame is scrolled to the top again.
5) Go down again, and click the same linke -> works 

Tested with releaseversion of Firefox 2.0 

Comment 2

[Brian Elliott]

I always have problems here

http://www.wiggle.co.uk/

Comment 3

[Hans]

I can confirm this bug using FF Version 2 under Win XP Professionell !

In an IFRAME / FRAME the first click to a link, href or to a FORM submit button for example does not work!!

Screen jumped to the top on the first click

The second click works fine. 

Comment 4

[Steve England [:stevee]]

Reporter, do you still see this problem with the latest Firefox 2 and the latest Java? If not, can you please close this bug as WORKSFORME. Thanks!

Comment 5

[Volker Schmidt]

Wasn't able to reproduce it, using 2.0.0.4.