Closed Bug 260049 Opened 21 years ago Closed 19 years ago

{incr} cell width information not honoured if in new attached row.

Categories

(Core :: Layout: Tables, defect)

x86
Linux
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: volker, Unassigned)

References

()

Details

Attachments

(5 files)

User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8a4) Gecko/20040910 Mnenhy/0.6.0.104 Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8a4) Gecko/20040910 Mnenhy/0.6.0.104 On page http://die-moells.de/volker/tests/small_table.html are 144 tables, generated with the same CGI code from http://die-moells.de/volker/tests/small_table.cgi_ (the "_" is important for download reason!). Some of the tables did not have the claimed fixed width of 600, they are only as wide as needed. It's not predictable, *which* tables are formatted incorrectly, but mostly there are some of them defective. Reproducible: Sometimes Steps to Reproduce: 1.Open http://die-moells.de/volker/tests/small_table.html Actual Results: Some tables are too short Expected Results: All tables should have width 600 as claimed in the code On http://die-moells.de/volker/tests/small_table.jpg you see a screenshot as a proof: Here tables 0009 and 0015 have this problem. I tried to simplify the CGI script generated the testing URL without much success. So sorry that my demo page is so large...
Attached image Screenshot as proof
Attachment #159200 - Attachment description: CGI script which creates demo page → Perl-CGI script which creates demo page
Attachment #159200 - Attachment mime type: text/tab-separated-values → text/plain
Bug is also in msvc-nightly. Testet with Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8a4) Gecko/20040917(02)
See Message-ID <414B1722.6030908@grull.com> from Sven Grull in de.comm.software.mozilla.nightly-builds: Sven can confirm the bug under XP with the latest nightly. And he changed the page, because it was not valid. the bug is still there. http://grull.com/mozilla/small_table.html The site in XHTML, so that it's rendered in Standard Compliance Mode, but unfortunately not valid. But in this rendering mode the bug still is present: http://grull.com/mozilla/small_table_x.html
I have added a vaild xhtml page: http://grull.com/mozilla/small_table_x_v.html For this page the bug is also present.
We need a really reduced testcase, I guess this is a incr. reflow bug, one needs to place layout-break points around/inside the table frames to make this reproducible ( see http://www.mozilla.org/newlayout/doc/fosdem2004/slide19.html and ff for a more detailed description how this can be done.)
Keywords: qawanted
Attached file New testcase
The <script> has to be between two table rows to trigger this bug.
Attached file Original testcase
It seems that I didn't attached the original testcase. Here is it. But there were no "<script>" tags in it.
Quite interesting: * If I chance in the GCI script from attachment #159200 [details] the number of tables from 150 to 10 and run this CGI script via apache2, table 9 in the majority of Ctrl-Shift-R[eloads] is shortened. * But when I "save as" exactly this output as an HTML page (or even "wget" it) I could not reproduce this bug at all: I tried it at least 50 times to Shift-Ctrl-R[eload] without any table being shortened. Is there any difference in layouting when viewing CGI vs. HTML pages?
Eriks testcase is exactly what I was looking for. Thanks a lot. The issue here is that during incr. reflow the width information of the cell is not honored it should. The CGI probably does not generate the HTML as fast as serving the page as HTML directly this causes incr. reflows. The mechanism is described in the link to the fosdem talk.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
Keywords: qawanted
Summary: Tables with fixed width are not rendered correctly sometimes (width is ignored) → {incr} cell width information not honoured if in new attached row.
Blocks: 271747
This got fixed on trunk between 2006-12-07 and 2006-12-08, so fixed by the reflow branch landing. I added a reftest in bug 271747, I think it basically covers also this testcase (I think this bug and that bug are basically the same).
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 19 years ago
Depends on: reflow-refactor
Flags: in-testsuite-
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Creator:
Created:
Updated:
Size: