40680 - (object-codebase) OBJECT attribute 'codebase' doesn't affect 'data' attribute

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Core Graveyard :: Plug-ins, defect, P4)

Description

[Antti Näyhä]

Overview description:
  The 'codebase' attribute of the HTML 4.0 OBJECT element is not supported.
  See http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/objects.html#adef-codebase-OBJECT
  for the definition.

Steps to reproduce:
  1) View the URL.

Actual results:
  A regular, non-inverted photograph of a handsome Labrador retriever embedded
  on the page.

Expected results:
  An inverted image of the same dog.

Build date & platform:
  2000-05-22-08, Linux.

Comment 1

[Antti Näyhä]

Oops, wrong URL.  Also adding 'html4' keyword and a dependency on this to bug
7954 (HTML 4 meta bug).

Comment 2

[karnaze (gone)]

Andrei, if you don't feel confortable with this, try to figure out who should 
help.

Comment 3

[Antti Näyhä]

I just realized that codebase _is_ actually supported - it just doesn't affect 
the 'data' URI, only 'classid'.  I haven't tested yet whether it affects 
'archive' or not.

Adjusting the summary.

Comment 4

[gerardok]

massive update for QA contact.

Comment 5

[Antti Näyhä]

I'll try to come up with a release note for this one ASAP.

Comment 6

[Antti Näyhä]

Proposed release note (for developer release notes):
"The 'codebase' attribute of the OBJECT element doesn't affect relative URIs in
the 'data' attribute value.  Workaround: use absolute URIs in the OBJECT's
'data' attribute value when 'codebase' attribute is present."

Feel free to try and clarify it if you think that sounds clumsy.

Comment 7

[ekrock's old account (dead)]

Nom. nsbeta1 on correctness-of-standards-compliance grounds. In particular,
until we fix this, we're essentially preventing developers from taking advantage
of codebase at all in their content and forcing them to use absolute URIs (which
are more labor-intensive to maintain).

Comment 8

[Hixie (not reading bugmail)]

Reassigning QA Contact for all open and unverified bugs previously under Lorca's
care to Gerardo as per phone conversation this morning.

Comment 9

[bsharma]

qa contact updated.

Comment 10

[karnaze (gone)]

moving to m0.9.1

Comment 11

[Peter Lubczynski]

not critical to 0.9.1 moving to 0.9.2

Comment 12

[Reinout van Schouwen]

<CLUELESS>
Does this bug have anything to do with the fact that the table at
http://www.sls.nl/hospiteren.htm fails to be populated in Mozilla yet works in
IE? If not, does anyone know if there is a bug report filed yet for this
phenomenon? This bug is the closest I could find...
</CLUELESS>

BTW... shouldn't mozilla0.9.2 keyword be added?

Comment 13

[Antti Näyhä]

> Does this bug have anything to do with the fact that the table at
> http://www.sls.nl/hospiteren.htm fails to be populated in Mozilla yet works in
> IE? 

No.  Nothing to do with 'codebase', but everything to do with ActiveX controls.
See http://www.iol.ie/~locka/mozilla/mozilla.htm for (rather technical) details 
about ActiveX support in Mozilla.

Comment 14

[karnaze (gone)]

Moving to m0.9.3

Comment 15

[av (gone)]

-->0.9.5

Comment 16

[Heikki Toivonen (remove -bugzilla when emailing directly)]

SPAM. HTML Element component is deprecated, changing to Layout component. See
bug 88132 for details.

Comment 17

[Heikki Toivonen (remove -bugzilla when emailing directly)]

Come on Bugzilla, you can do it...

Comment 18

[rubydoo123]

moving 1.1

Comment 19

[rubydoo123]

this particular issue works for plug-ins, but does not work for images and
documents. Reassigning to Peter, since he has done this for plug-ins

Comment 20

[Daniel Brooks [:db48x]]

Attachment: 40680-1.diff

that should fix it

Comment 21

[Daniel Brooks [:db48x]]

oh, it should be noted that this patch depends on the one in bug 213701

Comment 22

[Daniel Brooks [:db48x]]

Attachment: 40680-2.diff

Actually, this one is probably better. It cleans up a few other places to use
the getters so that it gets absolute urls automatically, and in some cases
doesn't resolve the urls twice.

Comment 23

[Anne (:annevk)]

Changing summary so it is clear this is not about data URIs.

Comment 24

[Christian :Biesinger (don't email me, ping me on IRC)]

sigh, it took me some time to realize that comment 23 should've said "data attributes" instead of "data URIs"

anyway, fixed by bug 1156.

Comment 25

[Anne (:annevk)]

What exactly is unclear about comment 23? I believe it describes what I meant...

Comment 26

[Christian :Biesinger (don't email me, ping me on IRC)]

oh. turns out I just misread it. sorry.

Comment 27

[Braden]

This isn't working anymore. See, for instance, the example in bug 401249.

Comment 29

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

This was fixed on the trunk (Firefox 3.0), not the 1.8 branch.

Comment 30

[Braden]

Yup, sorry. I had tried it in Gran Paradiso Alpha 7, where it failed; but it does appear to be working in the latest nightly.