All users were logged out of Bugzilla on October 13th, 2018

pref-colors.xul accesskeys need to move to .dtd

RESOLVED FIXED

Status

P3
normal
RESOLVED FIXED
19 years ago
14 years ago

People

(Reporter: fergus, Assigned: bugs)

Tracking

({verifyme})

Trunk
verifyme

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

(Reporter)

Description

19 years ago
xpfe/components/prefwindow/resources/content/pref-colors.xul 

This file contains 5 accesskey definitions which should be moved to the 
corresponding .dtd file.

The lines in question are as follows:
<html:label for="browserWFEUseWindowsColors" accesskey="w" tabindex="0">
<html:label for="browserUnderlineAnchors" accesskey="u" tabindex="0">			
<html:label for="browserUseDocumentColors0" accesskey="a" tabindex="0">
<html:label for="browserUseDocumentColors1" accesskey="a" tabindex="0">
<html:label for="browserUseDocumentColors" accesskey="a" tabindex="0">
I'll take these...
Assignee: matt → ben
fix checked in. 
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 19 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED

Comment 3

19 years ago
Bulk move of all Pref UI component bugs to new Preferences component.  Pref UI 
component will be deleted.
Component: Pref UI → Preferences
if verification is as easy as making sure those lines appear in the dtd file,
cool, then 'verifyme' can be removed from keywords. otherwise, if there's
additional functionality that needs testing here, i'd like some other [qa or
otherwise] help on verifying this.
Keywords: verifyme
(Reporter)

Comment 5

19 years ago
Verification should proceed as follows:
1) Have the English UI strings been moved from the .xul file to the .dtd file?
2) Does the UI in this file actually display correctly at runtime?
3) Does the entity name in the .xul file match the entity name in the .dtd file?  
If not, the string concerned will not display correctly (and probably will not 
display at all).
all the accesskeys listed above are fine, except for:

a. browserUseDocumentColors1: there doesn't seem to be ignoreDocColors.accesskey
in pref-colors.xul, even though there *is* a ignoreDocColors.accesskey "i" in
pref-colors.dtd. i know that Color prefs have been disabled for beta1, but was
wondering whether "a" (mentioned above) or "i" is correct.

b. there doesn't seem to be a corresponding entity in the .dtd for
browserUseDocumentColors... i think...

john, might you have further insight on this? thx!
QA Contact: sairuh → jrgm

Comment 7

19 years ago
  ---
re: point a :  "i" is a reasonable choice for the accesskey, given the phrase:
  <!ENTITY  ignoreDocColors.label "use my chosen colors ignoring the colors 
provided">
  <!ENTITY  ignoreDocColors.accesskey "i">

  ---
re: point b : nope, there is no entity &browserUseDocumentColors;. It was 
actually old
cruft that was commented out, and ben nuked it as part of this fix.

  ---
But (there's always a but ...) the accesskey for alwaysUseDocColors looks wrong
  <!ENTITY  alwaysUseDocColors.label "use the colors and background supplied by 
the webpage">
  <!ENTITY  alwaysUseDocColors.accesskey "a">

Probably should be : 
  <!ENTITY  alwaysUseDocColors.label "always use the colors and background 
supplied by the webpage">
--------------------------------------^

Reopening for that last point (but who supplies the correct wording?)

Comment 8

19 years ago
reopening (sorry for the spam; forgot the radio last time).
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---

Comment 9

19 years ago
fix checked in
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 19 years ago19 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Product: Browser → Seamonkey
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.