297504 - DIV behaving differently in FF1.0 & Deer Park

Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME

(Core :: Layout, defect)

Description

[David Grant]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8b2) Gecko/20050610 Firefox/1.0+
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8b2) Gecko/20050610 Firefox/1.0+

On the page http://youngpup.net/faq , there is a white div in the main content,
I believe the id is either "main" or "content".

In FF 1.0, when you scroll down the page, the white div extends to the end of
the page.
In my nightly Deer Park build, this div stops right below the height of the
first page.

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Open http://youngpup.net/faq
2. Scroll down in each browser and watch the white background.
3. Profit.
Actual Results:  
Both FF versions produce different results.

Expected Results:  
Seems like both versions should produce the same results.

I'm not sure this is a bug... and I couldnt even begin to search for a
duplicate.  Sorry!  Thought someone on your end would be able to tell for sure.

Comment 1

[Martijn Wargers (dead)]

div id="content" has height:100%;.
It takes the height of the viewport here as a reference, because the containing
div and the body don't have any height set.
See:
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#the-height-property
"<percentage>
    Specifies a percentage height. The percentage is calculated with respect to
the height of the generated box's containing block. If the height of the
containing block is not specified explicitly (i.e., it depends on content
height), and this element is not absolutely positioned, the value computes to
'auto'. A percentage height on the root element is relative to the initial
containing block."
also try to read the stuff on the containing block and initial containing block.

I think that current trunk builds of Mozilla are doing the right thing.

Comment 2

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

Is this still an issue?  The site looks fine to me...

Comment 3

[David Grant]

(In reply to comment #2)
> Is this still an issue?  The site looks fine to me...

I believe Martin is right... Deer Park had this fixed.

Comment 4

[José Jeria]

WFM as well --> wfm (based on all comments)