98561 - very bad table layout on URL

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(Core :: Layout, defect)

Description

[Alexandru Savulov]

unlike "the others" our browser displays this page very ugly, with big gaps
between the images. there is some freakin' javascript on the page that seems to
cause this  kind of layouting.

Comment 1

[Alexandru Savulov]

Attachment: testcase (hope they won't change the page soon)

Comment 2

[Alexandru Savulov]

the problem is that the suckers use a *.jpg file that does not exist as a spacer
image (forget what I wrote about javascript).

we do not display/dimension the cells correctly if the file is missing
that's why the incremental reflow takes that long

Comment 3

[James Lariviere]

hmmm... if it is the broken image that is causing the rendering gaps than this
is related to bug 41924.  Dupe or depends?

Comment 4

[Alexandru Savulov]

Attachment: new local testcase

Comment 5

[Alexandru Savulov]

well yes, is sure related to that bug but not really a dup. let's say it depends
on  that one. the problem here is that cells consider the bogus image as an
empty content and so they do not display. whatever...

there is another concern about this kind of tables we have here. obviously the
folks that use this kind of table dimensioning are using the spacer cells as a
ruler for the colspan/rowspan cell. the missing images are causing a big
performance decrease be cause of the many incremental reflow passes that hve to
be done until the column widths are calculated (and then at the end we're still
wrong :-) check the test cases with "opera".

Comment 6

[Alexandru Savulov]

Attachment: the width problem without image (compare to IE5.5)

Comment 7

[gabriel]

Is it also related to bug 97619 ?

Comment 8

[Marc Attinasi]

Not related to bug 97619 - this was broken back in NS6.1 (mozilla0.9.2). The fix
for 97619 has no impact on the layout of callingcards.com

Comment 9

[Michael Kaufmann]

Mozilla replaces broken images with the ALT text. Because there's no ALT text
for the spacer jpg, it's just replaced by nothing. See also bug 98017 (same
problem).

Comment 10

[Marc Attinasi]

So, the question is, do we try to emulate IE here, or just leave what we have?
We do need to revisit our missing-image handling policy, so maybe this should be
considered for Quirks mode....

Comment 11

[Marc Attinasi]

Decided not to fix it - please provide compelling reason if you reopen.