new text for about:mozilla

VERIFIED FIXED in mozilla1.5final

Status

()

--
enhancement
VERIFIED FIXED
16 years ago
9 years ago

People

(Reporter: dwitte, Assigned: gerv)

Tracking

({fixed1.5})

Trunk
mozilla1.5final
fixed1.5
Points:
---
Bug Flags:
blocking1.5 -

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

Attachments

(2 attachments, 4 obsolete attachments)

(Reporter)

Description

16 years ago
There are some nice suggestions floating around for about:mozilla. One of my
favorites is http://xulplanet.com/ndeakin/arts/mozilla715.html.

Neal, if you'd like to give us permission to use your text in mozilla, I can
post a patch for it, and see what other folk think.
well, as I said on irc, my favourite would be http://www.mversen.de/

Comment 2

16 years ago
Sorry Dan, it's a dupe of bug 160156, assigned to asa.

PS: I vote for this first suggestion in this bug :-)
(Reporter)

Comment 3

16 years ago
ah, good find... however, we have a couple of good suggestions here, so i'd
rather not dupe it... (if anything, maybe dupe the other one to this).

cc'ing asa.
Go for it.

Or, perhaps a combination of the two suggestions.
(Reporter)

Comment 5

16 years ago
thanks! here's a patch for the first suggestion...
(Reporter)

Comment 6

16 years ago
Comment on attachment 128041 [details] [diff] [review]
about:mozilla text per comment 0

Asa, would you like to take a look at this? thx!
Attachment #128041 - Flags: review?(asa)

Comment 7

16 years ago
This would make a nice about for Firebird but I'm not sure we want to replace
SeaMonkey's about:mozilla with this.
Asa: what Do you think from comment#1 (it's from Stephend's Blog)
If you do use mine, at least spell my name right. ;)

-     Neal Deakin <enndeakin@sympatico.ca>
+     Neil Deakin <enndeakin@sympatico.ca>

Comment 10

16 years ago
Nobody dares to put direct links to the 'unbelievers', 'Mammon' and the 2 birds
in this text (comment 0) ? Or is that a bit too much ;-)

Comment 11

16 years ago
*** Bug 213645 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 12

16 years ago
some words of revenge about netscap'e death would be nice

Comment 13

16 years ago
take a look at the duplicate bug (I posted it),, and read the other two about:
suggestions
Posted patch Patch v.2 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Patch with "(Red Letter Edition)" removed. Let's get this in for beta. :-)

Gerv
Attachment #128041 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Taking.

Gerv
Assignee: bugs → gerv
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla1.5beta
Comment on attachment 130330 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch v.2

Dan, you seem like as good a person as any to rubber-stamp this, unless Neal
wants to.

(staff@mozilla.org have agreed to this change, and I've been given the job of
making it happen.)

Gerv
Attachment #130330 - Flags: review?(dwitte)
Particularly, I've inserted a couple of &nbsp;s because italic f's have a big
tail, and it doesn't look like there's a space before "fell" or "fire"
otherwise. But if the space is too big on your OS, we may have to think of
another solution.

Gerv
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Gerv, if you want spacing, please use CSS, not &nsbp;
caillon: care to be more specific? 

.fixthepoorfontspacingalgorithm { padding-left: 1ex }
...
<span class="fixthepoorfontspacingalgorithm">fall</span>

?

Gerv
Comment on attachment 128041 [details] [diff] [review]
about:mozilla text per comment 0

(obsolete patch => clearing review request)
Attachment #128041 - Flags: review?(asa)

Comment 21

16 years ago
*** Bug 160156 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
(Reporter)

Comment 22

16 years ago
yeah, those &nbsp;'s aren't so nice... also, for some reason I misspelt Neil's
name (see comment 9), so please correct that.

+     Neal Deakin <enndeakin@sympatico.ca>

Comment 23

16 years ago
gerv: which OS/fonts are you using that have the "f" problem?

Comment 24

16 years ago
Posted file a slightly modified version (obsolete) —
Red Hat Linux 8, KDE, adobe-times-iso8859-1, 16px base size.

Basic's attachment is pretty good, although .3ex would probably make them match
the other ones more exactly.

Gerv

Comment 26

16 years ago
If 'f' and its appearance means so much then maybe line spacing also needs some
work. For example depending on the width of browser window "cowered in horror"
can be layed out on its own line. When that happens, it has much smaller line
spacing that other lines :)

Comment 27

16 years ago
--and what about implementing an about:netscape command, as a tribute?
asko: only on very small browser windows.

galileo: that's not what this bug is about.

Let's go with basic's version.

Gerv
This is probably too late for 1.5b, but it doesn't hurt to ask.

Gerv
Flags: blocking1.5b?
(Reporter)

Updated

16 years ago
Attachment #130330 - Flags: review?(dwitte)
Attachment #130344 - Flags: approval1.5b?
Comment on attachment 130344 [details]
a slightly modified version

Requesting approval for 1.5.

Gerv
Attachment #130344 - Flags: approval1.5b? → approval1.5?
Flags: blocking1.5b? → blocking1.5?
Comment on attachment 130344 [details]
a slightly modified version

a=asa (on behalf of drivers) for checkin to Mozilla 1.5
Attachment #130344 - Flags: approval1.5? → approval1.5+
approved to land but wouldn't block 1.5 for this. 
Flags: blocking1.5? → blocking1.5-
(Reporter)

Comment 33

16 years ago
gerv: let me know if you'd like me to land this for you.

Comment 34

16 years ago
Comment on attachment 130344 [details]
a slightly modified version

Is it not a bug that the f's have big tails and do bad things? if that's a bug
then shouldn't we fix it before we go introducing a buggy bandaged document
which will live forever?

On my relatively typical w2k install the f's are too far shifted from the
preceding words.

Offtopic, who's rejoicing? The following sentence seems to be a non sequitur.

usually "but" means the next thing contradicts the previous. Something like

... and the believers mourned. But all was not lost, for out of the ashes ...
Attachment #130344 - Flags: superreview?(dbaron)

Comment 35

16 years ago
timeless:
Your "f" problem isn't seen on my Linux XFT-enabled build. It might be
Win32-only or specific for some certain config you have on your system.
Fixed.

Checking in xpfe/global/resources/content/mozilla.xhtml;
/cvsroot/mozilla/xpfe/global/resources/content/mozilla.xhtml,v  <--  mozilla.xhtml
new revision: 1.5; previous revision: 1.4
done

Gerv
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 16 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED

Comment 37

16 years ago
> asko: only on very small browser windows.

Actually, he had a good point. And it's not just for small browser windows. My
browser is 1080px width, and "cowered in horror." ends up on a line by itself.
With no <em>'d text in the taller font, the spacing really looks off on the page.

More minor of a display issue: the /f/ spacing looks like it is a little bit
bigger than the rest, especially when compared to the /t/ from thunder very
close to it. RH8, gtk2 build.
Jeremy: actually, you have a good point. Can anyone work out how to guarantee
consistent line-height? I can't. 

BTW, the checked-in f-spacing was .3em instead of .4em.

Gerv

Comment 39

16 years ago
Asa said in comment 7: "This would make a nice about for Firebird but I'm not
sure we want to replace SeaMonkey's about:mozilla with this."

Right now, it's replaced in SeaMonkey but not in Firebird...

Comment 40

16 years ago
Gerv: can't you set line-height for the whole paragraph based on the max of
1.3em text height? See what the line-height Moz works out to automatically for
those lines, and then set all the lines to that.

N.B.: I often assume CSS can, you know, do simple text stylings. Most of the
time I am proven wrong.

> BTW, the checked-in f-spacing was .3em instead of .4em.

I think you mean ex, not em. That should be the appropriate spacing. It's a
shame this hack is needed though. I use italicized text quite a bit in my
weblog, and it always renders quite poor on Linux/Firebird, compared to
Windows/IE. (though it doesn't seem as bad with the gtk2 builds)
Steffen: the patch was made and approved for Mozilla. However, I didn't know
Mozilla Firebird used a different about:mozilla file. Where is that stored?

Jeremy: I had a go at that, but I'm not a CSS expert. Perhaps someone a bit more
skilled can have a go.

Gerv

Comment 43

16 years ago
line-height: 1.5em should do the trick.
the "f" padding-left is 0.3ex. I think 0.2ex looks even better though.

Comment 44

16 years ago
Steffen's version looks much better when no <em> text ends up on the last line.
The 0.2ex looks a bit better too, I believe. Again, at least on Linux/RH8/FB/gtk2.

Seperately: The whole div moves down the wider my window gets. The actual text
remains on two lines, so I don't know why margin-top: 15%; would affect vertical
spacing when only total horizontal size grows.
It definitely looks better than before; but, after having set it, you would
expect the line-height to be exactly the same for all lines, wouldn't you?
Because it's not (with 'cowered in horror' on its own), by a few pixels. The
cowered in horror line is still smaller.

Is there some other measure (line-depth?) we haven't altered?

Gerv

Comment 46

16 years ago
Gerv, you're right. Line-height refers to the font size. The larger the font
size, the larger the space between lines. This is more visible if you set "em"
to a much larger size, like font-size:4em. The "covered by horror" line is too
small indeed.

"Line-stacking-strategy" from the css3 line module looks promising, but that
doesn't seem to have been implemented yet.
http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-linebox/#LineStacking

But I've got another solution.

Comment 47

16 years ago
By setting em {line-height: 0}, I get rid of the influence of the em font-size
to the line-height.
To see the effect, first try #moztext {line-height: 1.5} and em {font-size:
4em}, without the line-height in em. The "cowered in horrer" line is much too
small.

Then try #mozext {line-height: 4} and em {font-size: 4em; line-height: 0}. The
"cowered in horror" line is fine.

Updated

16 years ago
Attachment #130330 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #130813 - Attachment is obsolete: true

Comment 48

16 years ago
my very first patch!

Updated

16 years ago
Attachment #130344 - Attachment is obsolete: true

Updated

16 years ago
Attachment #131406 - Flags: review?(gerv)

Comment 49

16 years ago
reopening to get this done.
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---

Updated

16 years ago
Blocks: 219222
Comment on attachment 131222 [details]
testcase with #moztext{line-height:1.5} and em{line-height:0}

Requesting module owner approval from blake or hyatt to land this in the
Firebird tree (for 0.7) as well.

Gerv
Attachment #131222 - Flags: superreview?(hyatt)
Attachment #131222 - Flags: review?(blake)
Comment on attachment 131406 [details] [diff] [review]
patch based on the last testcase

r=gerv.

Gerv
Attachment #131406 - Flags: review?(gerv) → review+
Comment on attachment 131406 [details] [diff] [review]
patch based on the last testcase

Asking for 1.5 approval - small tweak to earlier fix.

Gerv
Attachment #131406 - Flags: approval1.5?

Comment 53

16 years ago
Comment on attachment 131222 [details]
testcase with #moztext{line-height:1.5} and em{line-height:0}

removing r= and sr= requests from the testcase.
Attachment #131222 - Flags: superreview?(hyatt)
Attachment #131222 - Flags: review?(blake)

Comment 54

16 years ago
Comment on attachment 131406 [details] [diff] [review]
patch based on the last testcase

Requesting sr for the patch.
Attachment #131406 - Flags: superreview?(hyatt)

Comment 55

16 years ago
Comment on attachment 131406 [details] [diff] [review]
patch based on the last testcase

On other thought: Gerv, please seek sr yourself if you want.
Attachment #131406 - Flags: superreview?(hyatt)
Comment on attachment 131406 [details] [diff] [review]
patch based on the last testcase

a=asa (on behalf of drivers) for checkin to the Mozilla 1.5 branch. Please add
the fixed1.5 keyword when this is landed on the branch. Thanks.
Attachment #131406 - Flags: approval1.5? → approval1.5+
Fixed (again :-).

Checking in ./xpfe/global/resources/content/mozilla.xhtml;
/cvsroot/mozilla/xpfe/global/resources/content/mozilla.xhtml,v  <--  mozilla.xhtml
new revision: 1.5.2.1; previous revision: 1.5
done

Gerv
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 16 years ago16 years ago
Keywords: fixed1.5
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: mozilla1.5beta → mozilla1.5final

Comment 58

16 years ago
Gerv, please check this into the trunk as well.
Tweak patch now checked into trunk also.

Gerv

Comment 60

16 years ago
Thanks, Gerv. -> verified.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED

Comment 61

14 years ago
Should this not be updated again :o\ Since the name-change from firebird to
firefox, the refference to the bird of fire is now redundent...
No. You are reading it far too literally ;-)

Gerv

Updated

14 years ago
Component: XP Miscellany → Networking

Comment 63

9 years ago
This maybe a wrong piece of information that i have found along my travels but i think how Firefox is know more popular than IE.

This is my idea of the content for the page

And the once mighty mammon has fallen to the ever growing beast,with this great victory the beast may one day banish the mammon for good

the place i got this information from is a website that i very much trust here is the link http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.