User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040914 Firefox/0.9 Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040914 Firefox/0.9 Mozilla supports "white-space: -moz-pre-wrap", which is proprietary, and not the CSS 2 property "white-space: pre-wrap", which is equivalent. Could it be added? Thank you. Regards, Hugo Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce:
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 230555 ***
13 years ago
See also bug 230555.
s/CSS 2/CSS2.1/ -->Accept, should be as simple as changing all in-source uses from -moz- to normal use. Dbaron, should I keep backwards compat somehow with current version, for websites which used it, similar to how we kept backwards compat with -moz-opacity ?
More needs to be done than just renaming. We first need to make sure it does what the spec says.
*** Bug 330706 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
10 years ago
I think we should do this now. Our white-space:-moz-pre-wrap handling has improved a lot and is now very good IMHO.
9 years ago
Created attachment 296444 [details] [diff] [review] fix? This should do it. We could give -moz-pre-wrap its own value so that getComputedStyle and readers of style.whiteSpace can still return "-moz-pre-wrap", but I don't think that should be necessary. There are a lot of uses of -moz-pre-wrap in stylesheets in our tree, which could be replaced in a separate patch. I did some testing and found bug 411792, which should be fixed before we land this.
9 years ago
Comment on attachment 296444 [details] [diff] [review] fix? r+sr=dbaron. I tend to think you should just remove -moz-pre-wrap (from nsCSSProps.cpp and nsCSSKeywordList.h). Could you add pre-wrap to layout/style/test/property-database.js too ?
> Could you add pre-wrap to layout/style/test/property-database.js too ? OK > I tend to think you should just remove -moz-pre-wrap (from nsCSSProps.cpp and > nsCSSKeywordList.h). We use it all over the place in our tree. I could do a big search-and-replace, but extensions may also use it, not to mention actual Web sites. Can we not do this in 1.9? I think it's polite to have a transition period with both are supported.
OK, fine to keep -moz-pre-wrap for 1.9 given how close to release we are, but file a bug on removing it afterwards.
Comment on attachment 296444 [details] [diff] [review] fix? For a long time we've supported CSS "white-space:-moz-pre-wrap" but it was too buggy to officially support it as "white-space:pre-wrap". Now, thanks to all the text work in 1.9, we think it's ready to enable via "pre-wrap"; that's all this patch does. The patch looks big but it's actually quite simple. The risk is that Web sites using "pre-wrap" might be broken by this change.
Comment on attachment 296444 [details] [diff] [review] fix? Thnx for the backgroun Roc
filed bug 418543 on removing -moz-pre-wrap.
This is already documented, marking as doc complete.