Clicking a URL on the address bar that overflows that URL bar, pressing End and clicking the content area (or horizontally scrolling the input using the mousewheel/trackpad) will apply the fading effect on the URL's host name
Categories
(Firefox :: Address Bar, defect, P3)
Tracking
()
People
(Reporter: itiel_yn8, Assigned: Gijs)
References
(Regression)
Details
(Keywords: regression, Whiteboard: [fxsearch])
Attachments
(3 files)
This is very similar to bug 1489402 and it's regression range is the same. STR: 1. Open any URL that overflows the URL bar 2. Click the URL bar 3. Press End on the keyboard 4. Click anywhere on the content area AR: The host name will have the fading effect on it. ER: The fading effect should be applied on the last visible characters of the URL. See attached screencast. 2018-10-03T20:28:56: DEBUG : Starting merge handling... 2018-10-03T20:28:56: DEBUG : Using url: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/json-pushes?changeset=621979b26f697513f06f4c5f2db1d5ee580c4363&full=1 2018-10-03T20:28:58: DEBUG : Found commit message: Bug 1485746 - Cursor gets reset to start of address bar on window switch. r=adw This restores the previous behavior where we set the selection only when setting a new different value Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D4528 2018-10-03T20:28:58: DEBUG : Did not find a branch, checking all integration branches 2018-10-03T20:28:58: INFO : The bisection is done.
Comment 2•5 years ago
|
||
Thank you for the detailed report. This is less critical, because that url was already shown to you properly. It's mostly an annoyance, not worth tracking for the release.
There's another STR resulting in the same effect: 1. Start typing in the URL bar a URL that already exists in your browser history and that overflows the URL bar 2. With the down arrow key, hightlight that item but don't click Enter 3. Click anywhere on the content area See attached.
Updated•5 years ago
|
![]() |
||
Updated•5 years ago
|
Comment 6•5 years ago
|
||
we probably need a further attribute that states whether the host is RTL or not, and then we can apply the css rule more precisely.
(In reply to Marco Bonardo [::mak] from comment #6) > we probably need a further attribute that states whether the host is RTL or > not, and then we can apply the css rule more precisely. Why RTL? The screencasts here were taken on RTL Nightly, but this affects also LTR. See attachment 9020599 [details]. (Unless you're referring to something else?)
Comment 8•5 years ago
|
||
I said RTL host, the locale directionality doesn't matter.
Assignee | ||
Updated•5 years ago
|
Updated•4 years ago
|
Comment 11•4 years ago
|
||
See comment 2 for marking it fix-optional.
Comment 12•4 years ago
|
||
Bulk change for all regression bugs with status-firefox67 as 'fix-optional' to be marked 'affected' for status-firefox68.
Updated•4 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Comment 14•4 years ago
|
||
Comment 15•4 years ago
|
||
Pushed by gijskruitbosch@gmail.com: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/7d116cd6cec3 only apply start-fade to url bar input if we've force-scrolled to the right because of an RTL domain, r=mak
Assignee | ||
Updated•4 years ago
|
Comment 16•4 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
Updated•4 years ago
|
Reporter | ||
Comment 17•4 years ago
|
||
This seems to be fixed now, but I'm unable to reproduce the steps from bug 1502402 to verify. Do we need qe+ here?
Assignee | ||
Comment 18•4 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Itiel from comment #17)
This seems to be fixed now, but I'm unable to reproduce the steps from bug 1502402 to verify.
Sorry, I don't understand this part. You reported this bug, so presumably when you reported it you could reproduce the problem. Are you saying on nightlies without this change, you can't reproduce the original bug as reported here / in bug 1502402 / in bug 1574257 ?
Reporter | ||
Comment 19•4 years ago
•
|
||
(In reply to :Gijs (he/him) from comment #18)
(In reply to Itiel from comment #17)
This seems to be fixed now, but I'm unable to reproduce the steps from bug 1502402 to verify.
Sorry, I don't understand this part. You reported this bug, so presumably when you reported it you could reproduce the problem. Are you saying on nightlies without this change, you can't reproduce the original bug as reported here / in bug 1502402 / in bug 1574257 ?
Bug 1502402 mentions "scrolling", but scrolling an overflowed urlbar doesn't seem to be a thing on Windows, presumably? Or maybe a mouse that has a horizonal scroller is required, not sure.
Assignee | ||
Comment 20•4 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Itiel from comment #19)
(In reply to :Gijs (he/him) from comment #18)
(In reply to Itiel from comment #17)
This seems to be fixed now, but I'm unable to reproduce the steps from bug 1502402 to verify.
Sorry, I don't understand this part. You reported this bug, so presumably when you reported it you could reproduce the problem. Are you saying on nightlies without this change, you can't reproduce the original bug as reported here / in bug 1502402 / in bug 1574257 ?
Bug 1502402 mentions "scrolling", but scrolling an overflowed urlbar doesn't seem to be a thing on Windows, presumably? Or maybe a mouse that has a horizonal scroller is required, not sure.
You can scroll input fields with shift+scrollwheel on windows (and, I guess, Linux, but I haven't tried). You don't need the modifier on mac.
Reporter | ||
Comment 21•4 years ago
|
||
Ah, okay then, awesome. Good to know, thanks.
So yeah, seems to be fully fixed.
Comment 22•4 years ago
|
||
Is this something we should consider for Beta uplift or can it ride Fx71 to release?
Assignee | ||
Comment 23•4 years ago
|
||
We've wontfixed for 6 releases and although there's some dupes, so I'm not sure it makes sense to rush it. On the other hand, the change is straightforward enough, though I don't feel we have a particularly great grasp of all the edgecases here. So I'm on the fence. Marco, thoughts?
Comment 24•4 years ago
|
||
I'd not rush it, as I said in comment 2 I don't think this is a critical problem, because the host was shown properly at least once, and this happens after an explicit user action.
If anyone posts good reasons to uplift it, then the patch doesn't look scary, so we can surely re-evaluate.
Updated•4 years ago
|
Description
•