Closed Bug 242893 Opened 21 years ago Closed 21 years ago

iframe hides contents following it

Categories

(Core :: Layout: Images, Video, and HTML Frames, defect)

defect
Not set
major

Tracking

()

RESOLVED INVALID

People

(Reporter: jongampark, Unassigned)

Details

User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8a) Gecko/20040505 Firefox/0.8.0+ Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8a) Gecko/20040505 Firefox/0.8.0+ When some HTML elements are located before and after an iframe, the iframe element hides the following HTML elements. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Please paste this and make an HTML file. ( This is obtained from http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/upgrade_2.html ) <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/strict.dtd"> <html> <head> <title></title> <meta name="Generator" content="TextPad 4.0"> <meta name="Author" content="?"> <meta name="Keywords" content="?"> <meta name="Description" content="?"> <STYLE type="text/css"> H1 { text-align: center} </STYLE> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000" link="#ff0000" vlink="#800000" alink="#ff00ff" background="foo.gif"> <DIV> <UL> <LI>Red</li> <LI>Blue</li> <LI>Yellow</li> </UL> </DIV> <IFRAME SRC="http://www.apple.com" /> <DIV> <UL> <LI>Red</li> <LI>Blue</li> <LI>Yellow</li> </UL> </DIV> </body> </html> 2. Open it with any Mozilla browser, for example, the FireFox. 3. See if the second list elements is hidden by the iFrame. Actual Results: The iframe hides the following list element. Expected Results: The iframe should not hide the list element. People, especially in Korea, complains other browsers than the MS IE. Well... I don't like the MS IE. However, Mozilla browsers should also take care of the HTML standard well, although it is still unfinished product. I visit http://www.joins.com regularly. I found out that a scrolling news marquee is not rendered as it should be. Please compare it with the IE. So, I checked the source code, although it is not made by me. I was going to complain to them with not-so-HTML-standard-compliant HTML code they wrote. However, I found out that the Firefox also can't handle the HTML standard well. Mozilla developer, especially people who write the Gecko core.. please check if the Mozilla core is fully compliant with the HTML standard.
Children of <iframe> shouldn't be rendered if the browser supports iframes... and this page has an unclosed <iframe> tag (<iframe/> is a closed tag in XML but NOT in HTML). So the rendering is quite correct... The page should be doing: <IFRAME SRC="http://www.apple.com"></iframe>
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 21 years ago
Resolution: --- → INVALID
(In reply to comment #1) > Children of <iframe> shouldn't be rendered if the browser supports iframes... > and this page has an unclosed <iframe> tag (<iframe/> is a closed tag in XML but > NOT in HTML). Then.. http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/upgrade_2.html sould be updated. Anyway, is there any program or test method for checking if the Mozilla based browsers are 100% standard compliant?
> Then.. http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/upgrade_2.html sould be > updated. Done. Thank you. > Anyway, is there any program or test method for checking if the Mozilla based > browsers are 100% standard compliant? Such a method would work for all browsers in general, no? It'd be a comprehensive testsuite for the standard involved. There is none for any web standard that I'm aware of. :(
>> Anyway, is there any program or test method for checking if the Mozilla >> based browsers are 100% standard compliant? > > Such a method would work for all browsers in general, no? It'd be a > comprehensive testsuite for the standard involved. It'd also be infinite in size, which is probably _why_ none exist... However it's easy to check if a browser is _not_ 100% compliant. Just find one test where it fails. That's rather easy to do.
Product: Core → Core Graveyard
Component: Layout: HTML Frames → Layout: Images
Product: Core Graveyard → Core
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.