Closed
Bug 18403
Opened 25 years ago
Closed 25 years ago
Rendering Engine: font and hr
Categories
(Core :: Layout, defect, P3)
Tracking
()
People
(Reporter: neilconway, Assigned: harishd)
Details
(Whiteboard: [testcase])
Attachments
(1 file)
336 bytes,
text/html
|
Details |
Sorry for the bad title, this is difficult to describe. The following HTML is rendered incorrectly by Seamonkey Nov/08/99 on Linux and Nov/07/99 on Windows 98. <FONT color=red> <FONT color=green>(1)Some green text</FONT> <HR> (2)Some red text, which can't be highlighted by the mouse<P> (3)Some text that should be red, but isn't</P> </font> The (1) is rendered correctly, and can be hightlighted. (2) is rendered visably correct, but can't be highlighted by the mouse. (3) has no formatting, but can be highlighted. When you remove the <hr>, the 2nd block of text can be hightlighted correctly, but the 3rd block still has no formatting. For a real-life example of this, see any message in any "Ultimate Bulletin Board", such as http://forum.arstechnica.com.
Comment 1•25 years ago
|
||
Updated•25 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [testcase]
Comment 2•25 years ago
|
||
Confirmed with 1999-11-08-09-M11 nightly binary on Windows NT. Added an attachment for the reporter's simplified testcase. Removing the <HR> from the testcase makes the (2) text highlightable, but the lack of colour in (3) remains. Note that the <HR> element is a block-level element and <FONT> elements cannot span blocks, so really the <FONT> element should be closed before the <HR> and a new <FONT> element opened after. Testing... with that modification, the (2) text can be highlighted. (Without the modification, the real question is why (2) is red at all.) The HTML 4 spec is uninformative about what can be expected for <FONT> as it is completely deprecated: <URL:http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/present/graphics.html#h-15.2.2> OTOH, the attachment has an HTML 3.2 DOCTYPE purposefully... OTO,OH, <HR> has always been a block-level element... Not sure that the testcase was ever valid html - is this INVALID?
There is certainly a residual style bug here. Harish, please check out the HR issue.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 25 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
Updated•25 years ago
|
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Comment 5•25 years ago
|
||
Agreed. Marking as verified dup of 991.
SPAM. HTML Element component deprecated, changing component to Layout. See bug 88132 for details.
Component: HTML Element → Layout
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•