- Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

[bug]: ignored CSS attributes on html element

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 08:51:25PM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 10:06:54PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 07:23:08PM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > > > On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 02:44:20AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > > Johannes wrote: > > > > > Please test attached patch. It is a bit more involved than I had > > > > > hoped, but it seems necessary after looking at the spec. > > > > > > > > en.wikipedia (with remote css off) gives me > > > > "** WARNING **: No background color found!" msgs. > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I think this is because I had to remove the > > > background-color property from the user-agent style in css.cc. > > > It's a bit weird: > > > The spec says, that the canvas color should either be the background color > > > assigned to the <html> tag, or if that has no background color, it > > > should be the background color of the <body> tag. > > > So we can't no longer set a background color in the user-agent > > > style. > > > If we assign it to the <html> tag, we will see a weird frame if page > > > authors set a background-color on the <body> tag. > > > If we assign it to the <body> tag, pages that set the > > > background-color for the <html> tag will have a frame. > > > > > > So maybe we need to reintroduce the bg_color dillorc option to set a > > > background-color if the page has no background-color on neither the > > > <html> nor the <body> tag. > > > Opinions? > > > > Can't we set both <html> and <body> ? > > Unfortunately no. > If we do that and the page sets background-color for body, we would > have a frame with our background-color and a box (for <body>) with > the background-color defined in the page. > Also if the page sets a background-color for <html>, we have a frame > with the pages background-color and a box with our color. I see... IMHO, having just one place for setting the appearance is an important asset (simplicity/orthogonality). If we can keep this feature without introducing an ugly hack I'd go for it. Now, as you know much better the implementation details, I leave it for you to decide. -- Cheers Jorge.-

Sept. 21, 2010

patch: clearer msg when something can't be displayed as an image

by corvid＠lavabit.com

I'm sure that our usual HTTP warning: unhandled MIME type: "text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" sort of msg is confusing to users in a "What? Dillo doesn't understand that character set?" sort of way when an img src attr is supposed to be modified by javascript or something.

Sept. 21, 2010

[bug]: ignored CSS attributes on html element

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 10:06:54PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 07:23:08PM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 02:44:20AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > Johannes wrote: > > > > Please test attached patch. It is a bit more involved than I had > > > > hoped, but it seems necessary after looking at the spec. > > > > > > en.wikipedia (with remote css off) gives me > > > "** WARNING **: No background color found!" msgs. > > > > > > > Yes, I think this is because I had to remove the > > background-color property from the user-agent style in css.cc. > > It's a bit weird: > > The spec says, that the canvas color should either be the background color > > assigned to the <html> tag, or if that has no background color, it > > should be the background color of the <body> tag. > > So we can't no longer set a background color in the user-agent > > style. > > If we assign it to the <html> tag, we will see a weird frame if page > > authors set a background-color on the <body> tag. > > If we assign it to the <body> tag, pages that set the > > background-color for the <html> tag will have a frame. > > > > So maybe we need to reintroduce the bg_color dillorc option to set a > > background-color if the page has no background-color on neither the > > <html> nor the <body> tag. > > Opinions? > > Can't we set both <html> and <body> ? Unfortunately no. If we do that and the page sets background-color for body, we would have a frame with our background-color and a box (for <body>) with the background-color defined in the page. Also if the page sets a background-color for <html>, we have a frame with the pages background-color and a box with our color. Cheers, Johannes

Sept. 19, 2010

[bug]: segfault from CSS patch + table + drag and drop

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 03:36:18PM +0100, Jeremy Henty wrote: > > There is unfortunately a severe problem with the CSS patch that was > posted recently (the one that fixed the handling of CSS properties on > the HTML element). It makes Dillo segfault when you drag the cursor > across the text in a table cell. Test HTML and a gdb backtrace are > attached. You can see that dw::fltk::FltkViewBase::drawRectangle() is > called with a NULL color. That is probabely because I had to remove the background-color definition from the user-agent style (see the other mail regarding reintroduction of bg_color in dillorc). This should be fixed once we add bg_color or find another solution. Cheers, Johannes

Sept. 19, 2010

[bug]: segfault from CSS patch + table + drag and drop

by onepoint＠starurchin.org

There is unfortunately a severe problem with the CSS patch that was posted recently (the one that fixed the handling of CSS properties on the HTML element). It makes Dillo segfault when you drag the cursor across the text in a table cell. Test HTML and a gdb backtrace are attached. You can see that dw::fltk::FltkViewBase::drawRectangle() is called with a NULL color. I haven't determined exactly which circumstances trigger the problem - text in <p>s and <li>s appears to be OK, but text in a <td> reliably segfaults. Any suggestions as to other elements that I could test? (NB: I compile Dillo with -O0, your backtrace may look a bit different if you use a different optimisation level. Also, I always run Dillo from valgrind.) Regards, Jeremy Henty

Sept. 19, 2010

[bug]: ignored CSS attributes on html element

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 07:23:08PM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 02:44:20AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > Johannes wrote: > > > Please test attached patch. It is a bit more involved than I had > > > hoped, but it seems necessary after looking at the spec. > > > > en.wikipedia (with remote css off) gives me > > "** WARNING **: No background color found!" msgs. > > > > Yes, I think this is because I had to remove the > background-color property from the user-agent style in css.cc. > It's a bit weird: > The spec says, that the canvas color should either be the background color > assigned to the <html> tag, or if that has no background color, it > should be the background color of the <body> tag. > So we can't no longer set a background color in the user-agent > style. > If we assign it to the <html> tag, we will see a weird frame if page > authors set a background-color on the <body> tag. > If we assign it to the <body> tag, pages that set the > background-color for the <html> tag will have a frame. > > So maybe we need to reintroduce the bg_color dillorc option to set a > background-color if the page has no background-color on neither the > <html> nor the <body> tag. > Opinions? Can't we set both <html> and <body> ? -- Cheers Jorge.-

Sept. 19, 2010

[bug]: ignored CSS attributes on html element

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 06:54:00PM +0000, corvid wrote: > Johannes wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 02:44:20AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > Johannes wrote: > > > > Please test attached patch. It is a bit more involved than I had > > > > hoped, but it seems necessary after looking at the spec. > > > > > > en.wikipedia (with remote css off) gives me > > > "** WARNING **: No background color found!" msgs. > > > > > > > Yes, I think this is because I had to remove the > > background-color property from the user-agent style in css.cc. > > It's a bit weird: > > The spec says, that the canvas color should either be the background color > > assigned to the <html> tag, or if that has no background color, it > > should be the background color of the <body> tag. > > So we can't no longer set a background color in the user-agent > > style. > > If we assign it to the <html> tag, we will see a weird frame if page > > authors set a background-color on the <body> tag. > > If we assign it to the <body> tag, pages that set the > > background-color for the <html> tag will have a frame. > > > > So maybe we need to reintroduce the bg_color dillorc option to set a > > background-color if the page has no background-color on neither the > > <html> nor the <body> tag. > > Opinions? > > Is it incorrect for dillo to have a body textblock smaller than the whole page? If I check <body style="border: 1px solid black"> dillo </body> with dillo and firefox, it seems that both do more or less the same. Cheers, Johannes

Sept. 18, 2010

[bug]: ignored CSS attributes on html element

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Johannes wrote: > On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 02:44:20AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > Johannes wrote: > > > Please test attached patch. It is a bit more involved than I had > > > hoped, but it seems necessary after looking at the spec. > > > > en.wikipedia (with remote css off) gives me > > "** WARNING **: No background color found!" msgs. > > > > Yes, I think this is because I had to remove the > background-color property from the user-agent style in css.cc. > It's a bit weird: > The spec says, that the canvas color should either be the background color > assigned to the <html> tag, or if that has no background color, it > should be the background color of the <body> tag. > So we can't no longer set a background color in the user-agent > style. > If we assign it to the <html> tag, we will see a weird frame if page > authors set a background-color on the <body> tag. > If we assign it to the <body> tag, pages that set the > background-color for the <html> tag will have a frame. > > So maybe we need to reintroduce the bg_color dillorc option to set a > background-color if the page has no background-color on neither the > <html> nor the <body> tag. > Opinions? Is it incorrect for dillo to have a body textblock smaller than the whole page? (I remember looking into this when we couldn't pop up menus below the bottom of the textblock, and I think it was either not quite trivial, or ugly to deal with, but if we accumulate other ugliness to work around it...)

Sept. 18, 2010

[bug]: ignored CSS attributes on html element

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 02:44:20AM +0000, corvid wrote: > Johannes wrote: > > Please test attached patch. It is a bit more involved than I had > > hoped, but it seems necessary after looking at the spec. > > en.wikipedia (with remote css off) gives me > "** WARNING **: No background color found!" msgs. > Yes, I think this is because I had to remove the background-color property from the user-agent style in css.cc. It's a bit weird: The spec says, that the canvas color should either be the background color assigned to the <html> tag, or if that has no background color, it should be the background color of the <body> tag. So we can't no longer set a background color in the user-agent style. If we assign it to the <html> tag, we will see a weird frame if page authors set a background-color on the <body> tag. If we assign it to the <body> tag, pages that set the background-color for the <html> tag will have a frame. So maybe we need to reintroduce the bg_color dillorc option to set a background-color if the page has no background-color on neither the <html> nor the <body> tag. Opinions? Cheers, Johannes

Sept. 18, 2010

[bug]: ignored CSS attributes on html element

by onepoint＠starurchin.org

On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 11:20:02PM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > Please test attached patch. It is a bit more involved than I had > hoped, but it seems necessary after looking at the spec. It works! Regards, Jeremy Henty

Sept. 18, 2010