481721 - get_childAtPoint fails on linux (enable this test)

Status: RESOLVED INCOMPLETE

(Core :: Disability Access APIs, defect)

Description

[alexander :surkov (:asurkov)]

spun off bug 481617 comment #3.

tests fails on linux
http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showlog.cgi?log=Firefox/1236258672.1236262193.5183.gz

*** 87 ERROR TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL |
chrome://mochikit/content/a11y/accessible/test_childAtPoint.xul | Wrong deepest
child accessible [ 'col2' , role: columnheader] at the point (157, 1) of
accessible [ 'tree' ] - got [xpconnect wrapped nsIAccessible], expected
[xpconnect wrapped (nsISupports, nsIAccessible, nsIAccessNode)]

Comment 1

[alexander :surkov (:asurkov)]

Let's move discussion here.

(In reply to comment #4)
> That looks like the test is just bogus.  Expecting particular interfaces on the
> object is silly, since the interfaces listed depend on who's QIed it to what.


(In reply to comment #7)
> According to the log the second test fails:
> testChildAtPoint(tree, x, y, true, "col1");
> 
> Let me see if I understand this. It looks like the x and y are the top left
> coordinates of the treecols.boxObject (relative to the document). So this test
> is expecting the top left coords of the treecols, to be a point contained by
> "col1". Maybe this is a bad assumption?
> 
> Perhaps the second test should use the x and y of the col1 boxObject? So in
> code-speak:
> 
> +      x = getNode("col1").boxObject.x;
> +      y = getNode("col1").boxObject.y;
>       testChildAtPoint(tree, x, y, true, "col1");
> 
> Thoughts?

I think the problem is we get wrong x coordinate. We expect to find col1 but we get col2. I don't think the problem in QI.

Comment 2

[alexander :surkov (:asurkov)]

The worst thing this test works successfully on my and Marco's linux machines.

Comment 3

[alexander :surkov (:asurkov)]

Btw, on my linux machine x coordinate is 145, on machine where test fails x coordinate is 157. Maybe it's timing problem?

Comment 4

[David Bolter [:davidb] (NeedInfo me for attention)]

Do you have more data on the coordinates of treecols, col1, col2?

Comment 5

[David Bolter [:davidb] (NeedInfo me for attention)]

I'm wondering about css padding. Treecols might have a different x y than col1.

Comment 6

[alexander :surkov (:asurkov)]

(In reply to comment #5)
> I'm wondering about css padding. Treecols might have a different x y than col1.

In this case we should get treecols accessible but we get col2.

Comment 7

[David Bolter [:davidb] (NeedInfo me for attention)]

AUTO-CLOSED. This bug untouched for over 2000 days. Please reopen if you can confirm the bug and help it progress.