Closed
Bug 1084370
Opened 10 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
<sup> and <sub> elements are offset the wrong way in vertical-lr writing mode
Categories
(Core :: Layout: Block and Inline, defect)
Core
Layout: Block and Inline
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla36
People
(Reporter: jfkthame, Assigned: jfkthame)
References
(Blocks 1 open bug)
Details
Attachments
(3 files, 2 obsolete files)
825 bytes,
text/html
|
Details | |
7.81 KB,
patch
|
smontagu
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
6.79 KB,
patch
|
jfkthame
:
feedback+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
See attached testcase. When writing-mode is vertical-lr, the "over/under" sides of the line are opposite to the "block-start/-end" sides, instead of matching them as is normal for horizontal and vertical-rl text. (The same would be true of vertical-rl with text-orientation:sideways-left, but we aren't implementing that yet.)
WritingMode exposes this as the IsLineInverted() method. When implementing NS_STYLE_VERTICAL_ALIGN_{SUPER,SUB}, we need to take account of this so as to apply the super/subscript shift in the appropriate direction in logical block coordinates.
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Blocks: writing-mode
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•10 years ago
|
||
I expect there'll be more places we need to take account of this, but this patch at least fixes the rendering of simple super/subscript examples.
Attachment #8506896 -
Flags: review?(smontagu)
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → jfkthame
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Attachment #8506896 -
Attachment description: Make text-align:super and :sub respect the IsLineInverted() attribute of WritingMode. → Make vertical-align:super and :sub respect the IsLineInverted() attribute of WritingMode.
Updated•10 years ago
|
Comment 2•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8506896 [details] [diff] [review]
Make vertical-align:super and :sub respect the IsLineInverted() attribute of WritingMode.
Review of attachment 8506896 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
::: layout/generic/nsLineLayout.cpp
@@ +1848,5 @@
> // offset to the baseline BCoord.
> nscoord parentSubscript = fm->SubscriptOffset();
> + nscoord revisedBaselineBCoord =
> + baselineBCoord + (lineWM.IsLineInverted() ? -parentSubscript
> + : parentSubscript);
Why not just use
baselineBCoord + parentSubscript * lineWM.FlowRelativeToLineRelativeFactor();
? (though that name seems clumsier than necessary!)
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•10 years ago
|
||
Yes, that'd work fine too -- I'd forgotten about that method when I wrote this.
Actually, I've been looking at more of the baseline and vertical-align issues, and might try to extend the scope of this bug a bit. Let's clear the r? here for now and I'll see if I can pull together a more complete patch.
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Attachment #8506896 -
Flags: review?(smontagu)
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•10 years ago
|
||
AFAICT, this fixes all the various vertical-align options, not just sub- and superscript.
Attachment #8516630 -
Flags: review?(smontagu)
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Attachment #8506896 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Comment 5•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8516630 [details] [diff] [review]
Fix handling of vertical-align in lines with vertical writing mode.
Review of attachment 8516630 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
::: layout/generic/nsLineLayout.cpp
@@ +1875,5 @@
> + // alignment except for the addition of the super/subscript
> + // offset to the baseline BCoord.
> + revisedBaselineBCoord += lineWM.FlowRelativeToLineRelativeFactor() *
> + (verticalAlignEnum == NS_STYLE_VERTICAL_ALIGN_SUB
> + ? fm->SubscriptOffset() : -fm->SuperscriptOffset());
I find this confusing. Can you take the special casing of _SUB and _SUPER outside the switch somehow?
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•10 years ago
|
||
Well, I was trying to share code as much as possible between the cases, but yeah, it's a bit opaque. How about this version? ISTM this may be one of those rare cases where a |goto| statement is actually appropriate... WDYT?
Attachment #8521593 -
Flags: review?(smontagu)
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Attachment #8516630 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8516630 -
Flags: review?(smontagu)
Comment 7•10 years ago
|
||
I was thinking more something like this. WDYT?
Attachment #8522069 -
Flags: feedback?(jfkthame)
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•10 years ago
|
||
That would also work; it's likely a little more expensive, in that it does an extra conditional separately from the switch() statement, but I don't suppose it matters much in the overall scheme of things. If you have a strong preference for that version, I can live with it.
Comment 9•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8521593 [details] [diff] [review]
Fix handling of vertical-align in lines with vertical writing mode.
Review of attachment 8521593 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
r=me on the rest of the patch. For me the increase in human-readability trumps the performance impact, which I think should be imperceptible here, but I'll let you choose which version to check in.
Attachment #8521593 -
Flags: review?(smontagu) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•10 years ago
|
||
OK, I landed this with your preferred approach (slightly modified -- the sub/sup check needs to be outside the "if (lineWM.IsVertical()) ..." block, otherwise it'd break them for horizontal mode).
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/f77efca402c2
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla36
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8522069 [details] [diff] [review]
Alternative version of the patch
Review of attachment 8522069 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
::: layout/generic/nsLineLayout.cpp
@@ +1861,5 @@
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if (verticalAlignEnum == NS_STYLE_VERTICAL_ALIGN_SUB ||
> + verticalAlignEnum == NS_STYLE_VERTICAL_ALIGN_SUPER) {
Just FTR, I've basically used this version, but pulled this chunk outside the if (lineWM.IsVertical()) conditional.
Attachment #8522069 -
Flags: feedback?(jfkthame) → feedback+
Comment 12•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Jonathan Kew (:jfkthame) from comment #10)
> OK, I landed this with your preferred approach (slightly modified -- the
> sub/sup check needs to be outside the "if (lineWM.IsVertical()) ..." block,
> otherwise it'd break them for horizontal mode).
Oops, I thought it *was* outside that block, and as you can tell I didn't test it very hard ;-)
Thanks!
Comment 13•10 years ago
|
||
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•