38883 - A:hover with image changes background colour but incorrectly sized box

Status: RESOLVED INVALID

(Core :: CSS Parsing and Computation, defect, P3)

Description

[aaron]

I am running Mozilla M15 under Windows NT to test my intranet Web site.

My pages use a style sheet that lights up hyperlink text with a blue background:

A:link {
  color :            #FFFF00 ; 
  background-color : transparent ; 
  text-decoration :  none ; 
}
A:hover { 
  color :            #FFFF00 ; 
  background-color : #FF0000 ; 
}
IMG {
	border-width :     0pt ;
	vertical-align :   middle ;
	background-color : transparent ;
}

Transparent GIFs that act as hypertext links also show this highlight through 
the transparency, and the effect is not too bad:

<A href="something.html"><IMG SRC="transparent.gif" ALT="Blue highlight"></A>

However, the highlight is only as big as normal text.  In M15, the width looks 
right but the height is wrong; IE5.0 (Win32) renders the highlight as intended 
(but it can't draw tables properly).  I'll add an attachment with an example.

Comment 1

[aaron]

Attachment: An example

Comment 2

[aaron]

Attachment: An image to accompany the previous attachment

Comment 3

[Hixie (not reading bugmail)]

This is per the spec. To get the effect you describe, use these styles:

:link, :link *, :visited, :visited * {
  color :            #FFFF00 ; 
  background-color : transparent ; 
  text-decoration :  none ; 
}
:link:hover, :visited:hover, 
:link:hover *, :visited:hover * { 
  color :            #FFFF00 ; 
  background-color : #FF0000 ; 
}
IMG {
	border-width :     0 ;
	vertical-align :   middle ;
}

Comment 4

[Hixie (not reading bugmail)]

As per meeting with ChrisD yesterday, taking QA.

Comment 5

[Hixie (not reading bugmail)]

Reassigning to chrisd for verification, since I marked it resolved.

Comment 6

[Hixie (not reading bugmail)]

Netscape's standard compliance QA team reorganised itself once again, so taking 
remaining non-tables style bugs. Sorry about the spam. I tried to get this done 
directly at the database level, but apparently that is "not easy because of the 
shadow db", "plus it screws up the audit trail", so no can do...

Comment 7

[Hixie (not reading bugmail)]

Reassigning to petersen for verification, since I marked it resolved.

Comment 8

[Jesse Ruderman]

See also bug 85354, an evangelism bug for a similar problem.