103385 - miserlymoms.com - text over text, doubled up text lines

Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME

(Tech Evangelism Graveyard :: English US, defect)

Description

[Brent]

From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20010913
BuildID:    2001091303

On this web page, the text looks as if someone has run a page through a printer
twice.

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
Go look at the given website.

Actual Results:  The last clear line (as of 1st week of Oct. 2001) is tip #178
which says
"My mom is a bridal seamstress and my dad is a pastor, and I design"

This is followed by
"Everyone has tons of people who say "let me know if you need help""
superimposed over
"and make custom bridal headpieces.  After being involved in tons of "
The web site changes weekly.

A similar problem was reported in bug 96736.  Also, see bug 94320 and
bug 84887.

Comment 1

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

The page does this on purpose:

<div style="width: 470; height: 19">

The there's lots of content in that (which overflows and is visible).  Then
there is lots of content after the end of the <div>, which starts 19px below the
start of the content in the div, so the two overlap.

Evangelism -- the site needs to fix it's CSS.

Comment 2

[Sterling Bates]

Hopefully this isn't a dumb question, but does the specification of a width 
and/or height imply absolute positioning over relative?

Comment 3

[Bob Clary [:bc] (inactive)]

First, they should be coding units on all css rules that specify a length. The
only length that does not require a unit is 0. In quirks mode (which they are
in), we assume they really meant pixel so that is not the cause of the layout
problem.

No, the height/width do not imply a change in the positioning. The problem on
this page is the inconsistent heights being applied to the nested divs. Look at
the source and you will see that the heights of the nest divs do not make sense.

There is a div (call it A) that is 268 pixels high that contains a div (call it
B) that is 19 pixels high that contains a div (call it C) that is 43 pixels
high. That just doesn't make sense. Add the fact that the content that is
contained in these divs take much more than 268, 19 or 43 pixels to display.

Since the overflow property is visible, content which does not fit within the
specified height will 'overflow' and be visible below the physical bottom of the
div. If you add style rules for the text color and border color on the divs on
the page, this would be clearer.

The content of div B div overflows it's boundary and spills out the bottom. The
content of div C overflows out of it's bottom. That results in the appearance of
the two divs overlapping.  

Add the incredibly nesting of divs on this page which makes understanding the
intended nesting difficult. The fact that the page was developed in Front Page 4
and tested in Internet Explorer does not mean that the layout you see in
Internet Explorer is correct. It just means that Front Page 4 used Internet
Explorer to display this HTML and since it seemed to do what was wanted, it was
accepted as correct.
It is easy to fix this: remove the heights on the divs A, B, C and the page will
display in Mozilla as you expect.

Comment 4

[Sterling Bates]

Ok, so if I understand correctly, Quirks mode is _very_ strict.  So what is the 
default value of the overflow value if it isn't explicitly specified?  Could 
the browser default that to scroll?  A link to a reference (which seems to be 
up-to-date on CSS guidelines) is 
http://www.blooberry.com/indexdot/css/properties/position/overflow.htm  
The "auto" option could be defaulted, with the scroll-bar as the default auto 
value.

Granted, I haven't read any RFCs, and so I don't know the whole line of 
thought.  My only suggestion is to find a graceful (and legal) way out of the 
headaches caused by [insert # here] Front Page (inc. Visual Studio) websites.

Comment 5

[Bob Clary [:bc] (inactive)]

http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visufx.html#overflow states that the initial value
of overflow is visible.

Actually, Quirks mode is less strict that Standards mode. The problem with this
web site is the improper use of height.

Are you the owner of this site? Can I consider this site contacted now?

Comment 6

[Zach Lipton [:zach]]

Mass reassign of all tech-evangelism us general bugs assigned to bc to 
doron except bc's P1 bugs. You may search for this mass reassign (it is 
305 bugs) by searching for the keyword 'greeneggsandham'

Comment 7

[Bob Clary [:bc] (inactive)]

tech evang june 2003 reorg

Comment 8

[Cyrille VIVION]

[bug248549notfixed]

Comment 9

[RNicoletto]

The site is WFM using Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13