Closed
Bug 392359
Opened 17 years ago
Closed 17 years ago
Some values of pointer-events not working
Categories
(Core :: SVG, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: tor, Unassigned)
Details
Attachments
(1 file, 1 obsolete file)
3.91 KB,
patch
|
longsonr
:
review+
roc
:
superreview+
vlad
:
approval1.9+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
The addition of containing rects to avoid unnecessary work broke some values of pointer-events in some circumstances, because the rect will not get initialized. See test cases on bug 347374 and this portion of the spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/interact.html#PointerEventsProperty
Attachment #276811 -
Flags: review?(longsonr)
Comment 1•17 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 276811 [details] [diff] [review] force hit testing when needed > #define HITTEST_MASK_FILL 1 > #define HITTEST_MASK_STROKE 2 >+#define HITTEST_FORCE_TEST 3 Shouldn't that be #define HITTEST_FORCE_TEST 4 Although I'd rather see #define HITTEST_MASK_FILL 0x01 #define HITTEST_MASK_STROKE 0x02 #define HITTEST_FORCE_TEST 0x04 Then it would be a little clearer these are supposed to form a set of bits At the moment HITTEST_MASK_FILL | HITTEST_MASK_STROKE == HITTEST_FORCE_TEST + mask |= + HITTEST_MASK_FILL | + HITTEST_MASK_STROKE | + HITTEST_FORCE_TEST; So this is mask |= HITTEST_FORCE_TEST for instance although I don't think you meant that.
Attachment #276811 -
Flags: review?(longsonr) → review-
Comment 2•17 years ago
|
||
In case I wasn't clear I think the only thing wrong is the #define value
(In reply to comment #1) > (From update of attachment 276811 [details] [diff] [review]) > > #define HITTEST_MASK_FILL 1 > > #define HITTEST_MASK_STROKE 2 > >+#define HITTEST_FORCE_TEST 3 > > Shouldn't that be > #define HITTEST_FORCE_TEST 4 Gah, how did I end up with that? I remember thinking when typing that line that it was a mask and I need a power of two. Gremlins, probably...
Attachment #276811 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #277009 -
Flags: review?(longsonr)
Updated•17 years ago
|
Attachment #277009 -
Flags: review?(longsonr) → review+
Attachment #277009 -
Flags: superreview?(roc)
Attachment #277009 -
Flags: superreview?(roc) → superreview+
Comment on attachment 277009 [details] [diff] [review] darn gremlins... Low risk specification conformance fix.
Attachment #277009 -
Flags: approval1.9?
Attachment #277009 -
Flags: approval1.9? → approval1.9+
Checked in.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 17 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•