Scrollbar inconsistency between themes (-moz-scrollbars-vertical)



16 years ago
10 years ago


(Reporter: Ruud, Assigned: shliang)


Mac OS X

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)




(2 attachments)



16 years ago
User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.2b) Gecko/20021105
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.2b) Gecko/20021105

Please view the test page with the Classic and Modern themes. On this page, the
overflow property (value: -moz-scrollbars-vertical) has been used. If not
applied, Netscape 7 and Chimera 0.6 do not display a scrollbar. If applied, the
page shows properly in Mozilla 1.2b (build 2002110508) in the Modern theme.
However, the Classic theme displays the page as Netscape and Chimera do: a
scrollbar appears but is inactive and inconsistent with the layer content.

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Apply Classic theme
2. Visit
Actual Results:  
Inconsistent display of vertical scrollbar.

Expected Results:  
Display scrollbar as in Modern theme.

Comment 1

16 years ago
I see it too and it looks correct with the Orbit3+1 theme. The thing that ties
this all together is that Chimera and the Classic theme both use the Mac OS X
"aqua" scroll bars. But I think the problem is really with your stylesheets. The
problem goes away if you remove *every* occurence of "overflow" except for the
one in "#soorttekstlayer". You have so many things overlapping I think you are
actually seeing the scroll bar for some other div. 

It's still odd that Mozilla would layer the scrollbars differently with
different themes, and end up with the wrong one on top. I think the bug is
actually with z-index when using Mac OS aqua scroll bars.

Comment 2

16 years ago
I have created two additional test pages.

All overflow attributes removed: Mozilla displays layers and scrollbars
correctly in all themes.

Overflow set to auto: Mozilla displays correctly in all themes.

Conclusion: css coding error! Or not?

1. Themes in Mozilla behave differently.

2. Although inappropriate discussing this here: the problem is that the latest
build of Mozilla displays correctly, Netscape 7 and Chimera do not. I was under
the impression that all use the same engine. However, Chimera 0.6 does not
display any scrollbars when the overflow is removed or set to auto. The same
applies for Netscape 7.

Comment 3

16 years ago
Ruud, can you still reproduce this problem using a current nightly build?

Comment 4

16 years ago
Created attachment 114774 [details]
Classic theme

The problem still persists. Here is the page in Classic theme.

Comment 5

16 years ago
Created attachment 114775 [details]
Modern theme

... and here the same page in Modern theme.

Comment 6

16 years ago
Why is overflow:-moz-scrollbars-vertical used rather than the standard

Comment 7

16 years ago
Because, as you can see in the other two example pages, Chimera and Netscape
were not displaying scrollbars at all. However, we have changed the code a bit.
Previously the z-index of the visible layer was increased, now the visibility of
the other layers are set to "hidden" and overlfow: "auto" is used.. This results
in normal scrollbars in all browsers.

Anyway, it's still curious that the themes render the page differently!

Comment 8

16 years ago
So it sounds like the only thing you're still reporting is that
overflow-moz-scrollbars-vertical doesn't result in a functioning scrollbar using
the Classic theme. Is that the case? Do you care about it?

Comment 9

14 years ago
Unfortunately, the three test-page URLs mentioned in this bug report no longer
exist. (They forward to the site's home page.) Else, I'd see if I could
reproduce this one using the latest Mozilla daily build under MacOSX.

-- David Lawhon

Comment 10

14 years ago
Probably this is related to

Comment 11

14 years ago
(In reply to comment #10)
> Probably this is related to

Perhaps, I think that it is it.
But there is no test page...
Last Resolved: 14 years ago
Resolution: --- → INVALID
Product: Core → SeaMonkey
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.