Closed Bug 859869 Opened 12 years ago Closed 12 years ago

font-size incorrectly being reported as overridden in inspector

Categories

(DevTools :: Inspector, defect)

Product:
DevTools
Component:
Inspector
Type:
defect
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

Status:
RESOLVED WONTFIX

People

(Reporter: vlad, Unassigned)

Details

Inspecting one of the body <p> elements at http://octopress.org/docs/theme/styles/ (in the octopress default theme, it's laid out like this anyway) shows a crossed-out "font-size: 1.15em;" inherited from <body>. It shouldn't be crossed out, it's still active and being applied -- changing the value changes the text size. There is a font-size: 100%; rule that's applied to the element, but that's [I think] based on the computed font-size (which is the 1.15em).
I see what you're saying, but the rule view's model of "overridden" is simply: 1. Find the line that determined the final value of a property. 2. Mark all other instances of that property "overridden". So, in that sense, it is correct, even though the "winning" definition's (font-size: 100%) computed value is based on one of the overridden properties. Any properties like "font-size" that can be inherited, but also allow values that are relative to their parent's value would demonstrate this issue. Can you think of a good way to mark something as "overridden, but still used"? I am not sure how do that in a way that is clear to the user.
Flags: needinfo?(vladimir)
This is something that we've argued about at length. I think that part of the problem is that the strikeout is a rather blunt instrument, but we don't have a better solution right now. The killer argument for the way it is now, for me, is opacity. If we accept that the font-size: 1.15em; isn't overridden then we'd have to say the same about a color:red element obscured by a semi-opaque element. At what point do we say that the obscured color is no longer overridden? It's also worth noting that other browsers have come to the same conclusion. Vlad - if you have ideas about a better way to represent these problems, then we're all ears, but for now I think I'll have to WONTFIX this. Please re-open if you think the logic is flawed, or raise another bug if you've got a better way to represent this situation.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Flags: needinfo?(vladimir)
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
Product: Firefox → DevTools
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.