Open Bug 1437716 Opened 8 years ago Updated 3 years ago

Web Platform Tests for focus are failing

Categories

(Core :: DOM: Editor, defect, P3)

60 Branch
defect

Tracking

()

People

(Reporter: mozilla-bugzilla, Unassigned)

Details

Attachments

(8 files)

User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0 Build ID: 20180212220112 Steps to reproduce: Ran the Web Platform Tests related to focus (http://w3c-test.org/html/editing/focus/processing-model/focus-fixup-rule-one-no-dialogs.html) Actual results: Firefox fails 6/7 tests. Expected results: Firefox passes all tests.
Component: Untriaged → Editor
Product: Firefox → Core
This also fixes https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=999619, where I've attached the patches the first time around.
Priority: -- → P3
Attachment #8950433 - Flags: review?(m_kato)
Attachment #8950434 - Flags: review?(m_kato)
Attachment #8950435 - Flags: review?(m_kato)
Attachment #8950436 - Flags: review?(m_kato)
Attachment #8950437 - Flags: review?(m_kato)
Attachment #8950438 - Flags: review?(m_kato)
Attachment #8950439 - Flags: review?(m_kato)
Attachment #8950440 - Flags: review?(m_kato)
Assignee: nobody → sorin.davidoi
Status: UNCONFIRMED → ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed: true
I've been told this might also fall in Neil's area.
Flags: needinfo?(enndeakin)
Attachment #8950433 - Flags: review?(m_kato) → review?(bugs)
Attachment #8950434 - Flags: review?(m_kato) → review?(bugs)
Attachment #8950435 - Flags: review?(m_kato) → review?(bugs)
Attachment #8950436 - Flags: review?(m_kato) → review?(bugs)
Attachment #8950437 - Flags: review?(m_kato) → review?(bugs)
Attachment #8950438 - Flags: review?(m_kato) → review?(bugs)
Attachment #8950439 - Flags: review?(m_kato) → review?(bugs)
Attachment #8950440 - Flags: review?(m_kato) → review?(bugs)
The main issue here is that there are lots of other ways to hide an element that don't involve setting attributes, and while the cases here should be handled, there are lots of others that aren't. Note also that the hidden and tabindex attributes don't have any meaning on elements in different namespaces, so shouldn't be treated as meaningful.
Flags: needinfo?(enndeakin)
(In reply to Neil Deakin from comment #11) > The main issue here is that there are lots of other ways to hide an element > that don't involve setting attributes, and while the cases here should be > handled, there are lots of others that aren't. Is there a centralized place where this can be hooked into?
layout, basically CSSFrameConstructor should know whether some element loses its nsIFrame object.
Sorin, are you possibly updating the patches or should I review them now or what? And sorry about delay.
Flags: needinfo?(sorin.davidoi)
I will try to update them.
Flags: needinfo?(sorin.davidoi)
Attachment #8950433 - Flags: review?(bugs)
Attachment #8950434 - Flags: review?(bugs)
Attachment #8950435 - Flags: review?(bugs)
Attachment #8950436 - Flags: review?(bugs)
Attachment #8950437 - Flags: review?(bugs)
Attachment #8950438 - Flags: review?(bugs)
Attachment #8950439 - Flags: review?(bugs)
Attachment #8950440 - Flags: review?(bugs)
(In reply to Olli Pettay [:smaug] from comment #13) > layout, basically CSSFrameConstructor should know whether some element loses > its nsIFrame object. I tried poking around but I can't identify where this happens.
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW

I think this can be set to unassigned since I'm not working on it anymore.

Assignee: sorin.davidoi → nobody
Severity: normal → S3
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Creator:
Created:
Updated:
Size: