Closed Bug 219052 Opened 21 years ago Closed 19 years ago

marquee does not consider padding-left of cell => table too wide

Categories

(Core :: Layout, defect)

x86
All
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: load, Assigned: martijn.martijn)

References

()

Details

(Keywords: testcase)

Attachments

(2 files, 2 obsolete files)

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5a) Gecko/20030728 Mozilla Firebird/0.6.1
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5a) Gecko/20030728 Mozilla Firebird/0.6.1

In the page http://www.globalchat.org/ the text is expanded to ocuppy all the
page width, when the "Shrink to fit page width" option in File -> Page Setup is
checked and also when it's not. Due to this, the text and images are not well
right-justified and the menu highlighting is larger than it should be.
Maybe my explanation is not so correct (hey, I'm spanish.. :P) but if you test
it you will understand what I'm trying to explain.

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
Those are print options, which aren't relevant.  The hover is changing the
background color of the table cell, which is too wide.  Such is the problem with
using tables for structural markup.

The nested table has a width: 100% which should inherit the width of 162px from
the parent cell, but isn't doing that for some reason.  setting the table width
to 162px renders as intended, but that indicates the width doesn't get inherited
properly

moving to tables component
Component: Preferences → Layout: Tables
Product: Firebird → Browser
Version: unspecified → Trunk
.
Assignee: blake → table
QA Contact: mpconnor → madhur
Is this a problem with a current build?  I'm not seeing any rendering problems
here with SeaMonkey 1.5b...
Using Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030911
Firebird/0.6.1+ everything is fine except the rollover for the menu, which pokes
into the white content area of the page.  I can attach a screenshot or update my
Seamonkey build if you can't see it.
Attached file Testcase (obsolete) —
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
Keywords: testcase
OS: Windows XP → All
Summary: "Shrink to fit page width" option is ignored and not stored → marquee does not consider padding-left of cell => table too wide
Attachment #131366 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #131368 - Attachment is obsolete: true
-> Layout
Assignee: table → other
Component: Layout: Tables → Layout
QA Contact: madhur → ian
Indeed, same goes if its aligned to the center.  Is there a way to figure out
the "visible" area of an element, taking padding/margin/etc into consideration
for untrusted script?
getComputedStyle may work for you (though if we change it to comply with the
spec it probably won't).
Attached patch patchSplinter Review
I might be missing something here, so this patch would cause a marquee
regression. Does anybody know what purpose the code serves, which I removed in
the patch?
I can't think of why the original code was there, been quite a while.  Not sure
if we want this this late in the 1.8 cycle though.  Might want to wait for 1.9.
The patch would make the behavior of bug 269257 a bit worse, but the initial
cause of that bug is something different.
Comment on attachment 187642 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

1.9 is fine by me, but it can already be reviewed, can't it?
Attachment #187642 - Flags: review?(doronr)
Blocks: 210729
Attachment #187642 - Flags: review?(doronr) → review?(bzbarsky)
Comment on attachment 187642 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

r=bzbarsky, but I don't know this code that well...  I'm assuming you've tested
well, right?
Attachment #187642 - Flags: superreview+
Attachment #187642 - Flags: review?(bzbarsky)
Attachment #187642 - Flags: review+
Assignee: layout → martijn.martijn
Checked in on trunk.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 19 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
(In reply to comment #16)
> (From update of attachment 187642 [details] [diff] [review] [edit])
> r=bzbarsky, but I don't know this code that well...  I'm assuming you've tested
> well, right?
Yes, I've tested on nearly all marquee testcases in bugzilla and some url's in
the wild, I haven't seen any regression.
This has also fixed bug 234134.
Blocks: 234134
Blocks: 269257
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: