Closed
Bug 49099
Opened 24 years ago
Closed 24 years ago
Style on table element does not propegate to containing elements
Categories
(Core :: CSS Parsing and Computation, defect, P3)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
WONTFIX
People
(Reporter: ken_mori, Assigned: pierre)
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
2.05 KB,
text/html
|
Details |
From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows NT 5.0) BuildID: 2000080712 Setting a font style on a dynamically created table does not propagate that style to containing elements Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.Create a table 2.Set a style class on a table 3.Add some elements to the table Actual Results: The font style on the table does not affect text elements within a table column Expected Results: Containing elements would inherit the container style except when explicitly overridden.
Comment 2•24 years ago
|
||
The test case lacks a doctype decalaration and is handled in the quirks mode, in which case not inheriting to tables is intentional. Marking invalid. Please reopen if you see the problem in the standards mode (ie. with the HTML 4 Strict doctype declaration).
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 24 years ago
Resolution: --- → INVALID
So if Netscape 6 is intended to be W3C compliant, why is the default behavior based on the Netscape 4 quirks mode? If the quirks mode is desired, why not force an explicit specification of this mode rather than requiring an explicit specification for operating in the mode based on W3C standards?
Status: RESOLVED → UNCONFIRMED
Resolution: INVALID → ---
Updated•24 years ago
|
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 24 years ago → 24 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
Comment 4•24 years ago
|
||
see http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/mozilla/modes for some info on when and why we use the quirks layout mode. Resolving as wontfix.
Comment 5•24 years ago
|
||
Netscape's standard compliance QA team reorganised itself once again, so taking remaining non-tables style bugs. Sorry about the spam. I tried to get this done directly at the database level, but apparently that is "not easy because of the shadow db", "plus it screws up the audit trail", so no can do...
QA Contact: chrisd → ian
Updated•23 years ago
|
QA Contact: ian → amar
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•