Closed Bug 434996 Opened 18 years ago Closed 15 years ago

Print fails CSS2.1 absolute positioning for paged media

Categories

(Firefox :: General, defect)

3.0 Branch
x86
Linux
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED WORKSFORME

People

(Reporter: simo.hellsten, Unassigned)

References

()

Details

User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9b5) Gecko/2008050509 Firefox/3.0b5 Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9b5) Gecko/2008050509 Firefox/3.0b5 Printing fails to respect CSS 2.1 position:absolute coordinates defined for paged media. Element is positioned instead at the top of page, printed on top of everything else. The page is valid XHTML 1.0 Strict with CSS 2.1 Printing works as expected on Firefox 2. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Print Actual Results: Positioned element is positioned incorrectly / ignoring positioning coordinates Expected Results: Element positioned according to CSS Some forums recommended disabling Xulrunner. This appears to have no effect on the result.
More detail: The bug appears to concern only positions affected by page height. See another example: http://www.kulma.net/simo/example/example2.html Positioning by percentage of height fails (top:50% and bottom:50%) as fails also positioning by distance from bottom of the page (bottom:50pt). All this does work with Firefox 2
Since Ubuntu now has version 3.0, just to add that this bug still exists in Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9) Gecko/2008061015 Firefox/3.0
Anybody got an idea how difficult a bug this is? Since it worked (works) perfectly on FF2 I wonder if I would be able to fix it myself, now that I'm back at the univerity and a bit more into programming... How much the CSS stuff changed from FF2 to FF3? Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.0.9) Gecko/2009042113 Ubuntu/8.04 (hardy) Firefox/3.0.9
This seems to work on FireFox 3.5, so I guess it is no longer important...
WFM based off of comment 4
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
Version: unspecified → 3.0 Branch
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.