Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use explicit height of inline-block fragments #12642

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Jul 29, 2016

Conversation

@notriddle
Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 28, 2016

When an explicit height is used for inline-block fragments, the line spacing algorithm should use that for the height above the baseline, instead of the intrinsic one.


  • ./mach build -d does not report any errors
  • ./mach test-tidy does not report any errors
  • These changes fix #12492 (github issue number if applicable).
  • There are tests for these changes

This change is Reviewable

@asajeffrey

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jul 29, 2016

LGTM. Squash if you like, then r=me.

@notriddle

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jul 29, 2016

  1. Not sure why I'd want to squash them. The commits are atomic.
  2. I can't r=asajeffrey. Bors doesn't listen to me.
@KiChjang

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jul 29, 2016

@bors-servo r=asajeffrey

@bors-servo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 29, 2016

📌 Commit 129d1d6 has been approved by asajeffrey

@bors-servo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 29, 2016

⌛️ Testing commit 129d1d6 with merge 8a09a03...

bors-servo added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 29, 2016

Auto merge of #12642 - notriddle:textarea_height, r=asajeffrey
Use explicit height of inline-block fragments

When an explicit height is used for inline-block fragments, the line spacing algorithm should use that for the height above the baseline, instead of the intrinsic one.

---

- [X] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors
- [X] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors
- [X] These changes fix #12492 (github issue number if applicable).
- [X] There are tests for these changes

<!-- Reviewable:start -->
---
This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="34" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/12642)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
@bors-servo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 29, 2016

@bors-servo bors-servo merged commit 129d1d6 into servo:master Jul 29, 2016

3 checks passed

continuous-integration/appveyor/pr AppVeyor build succeeded
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
homu Test successful
Details

@notriddle notriddle deleted the notriddle:textarea_height branch Jul 29, 2016

pcwalton added a commit to pcwalton/servo that referenced this pull request Oct 12, 2016

layout: Use the margin box for vertical positioning of `inline-block`
fragments if `overflow` is not `visible` per CSS 2.1 § 10.8.1.

Additionally, this patch reverts the change introduced in servo#12642 in
favor of the spec-compliant behavior described above. This patch also
removes the `inline_block_overflow.html` reftest introduced in servo#3725, as
the behavior it expected contradicted CSS 2.1 (and in fact the test
fails in Gecko).

The changes that this patch makes to `input_selection_a.html` and
`input_selection_incremental_a.html` are necessary workarounds to make
the tests pass in light of the fact that Servo's UA stylesheet applies
`overflow: hidden` to `<input>` elements. I believe that the changes are
not necessary in other rendering engines because they hard-code
`overflow: hidden`-like behavior for `<input>` elements, while Servo
uses the actual CSS `overflow: hidden` behavior. As far as I can tell,
Servo's behavior is arguably more spec-compliant, but it remains to be
seen how Web compatible it is.

Improves the Google results pages.

Closes servo#13707.

pcwalton added a commit to pcwalton/servo that referenced this pull request Oct 12, 2016

layout: Use the margin box for vertical positioning of `inline-block`
fragments if `overflow` is not `visible` per CSS 2.1 § 10.8.1.

Additionally, this patch reverts the change introduced in servo#12642 in
favor of the spec-compliant behavior described above. This patch also
removes the `inline_block_overflow.html` reftest introduced in servo#3725, as
the behavior it expected contradicted CSS 2.1 (and in fact the test
fails in Gecko).

The changes that this patch makes to `input_selection_a.html` and
`input_selection_incremental_a.html` are necessary workarounds to make
the tests pass in light of the fact that Servo's UA stylesheet applies
`overflow: hidden` to `<input>` elements. I believe that the changes are
not necessary in other rendering engines because they hard-code
`overflow: hidden`-like behavior for `<input>` elements, while Servo
uses the actual CSS `overflow: hidden` behavior. As far as I can tell,
Servo's behavior is arguably more spec-compliant, but it remains to be
seen how Web compatible it is.

Improves the Google results pages.

Closes servo#13707.

bors-servo added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 13, 2016

Auto merge of #13732 - pcwalton:inline-block-vertical-align-overflow,…
… r=notriddle

layout: Use the margin box for vertical positioning of `inline-block` fragments if `overflow` is not `visible` per CSS 2.1 § 10.8.1.

Additionally, this patch reverts the change introduced in #12642 in
favor of the spec-compliant behavior described above. This patch also
removes the `inline_block_overflow.html` reftest introduced in #3725, as
the behavior it expected contradicted CSS 2.1 (and in fact the test
fails in Gecko).

The changes that this patch makes to `input_selection_a.html` and
`input_selection_incremental_a.html` are necessary workarounds to make
the tests pass in light of the fact that Servo's UA stylesheet applies
`overflow: hidden` to `<input>` elements. I believe that the changes are
not necessary in other rendering engines because they hard-code
`overflow: hidden`-like behavior for `<input>` elements, while Servo
uses the actual CSS `overflow: hidden` behavior. As far as I can tell,
Servo's behavior is arguably more spec-compliant, but it remains to be
seen how Web compatible it is.

Improves the Google results pages.

Closes #13707.

r? @notriddle

<!-- Reviewable:start -->
---
This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="34" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/13732)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->

bors-servo added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 13, 2016

Auto merge of #13732 - pcwalton:inline-block-vertical-align-overflow,…
… r=notriddle

layout: Use the margin box for vertical positioning of `inline-block` fragments if `overflow` is not `visible` per CSS 2.1 § 10.8.1.

Additionally, this patch reverts the change introduced in #12642 in
favor of the spec-compliant behavior described above. This patch also
removes the `inline_block_overflow.html` reftest introduced in #3725, as
the behavior it expected contradicted CSS 2.1 (and in fact the test
fails in Gecko).

The changes that this patch makes to `input_selection_a.html` and
`input_selection_incremental_a.html` are necessary workarounds to make
the tests pass in light of the fact that Servo's UA stylesheet applies
`overflow: hidden` to `<input>` elements. I believe that the changes are
not necessary in other rendering engines because they hard-code
`overflow: hidden`-like behavior for `<input>` elements, while Servo
uses the actual CSS `overflow: hidden` behavior. As far as I can tell,
Servo's behavior is arguably more spec-compliant, but it remains to be
seen how Web compatible it is.

Improves the Google results pages.

Closes #13707.

r? @notriddle

<!-- Reviewable:start -->
---
This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="34" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/13732)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->

pcwalton added a commit to pcwalton/servo that referenced this pull request Oct 13, 2016

layout: Use the margin box for vertical positioning of `inline-block`
fragments if `overflow` is not `visible` per CSS 2.1 § 10.8.1.

Additionally, this patch reverts the change introduced in servo#12642 in
favor of the spec-compliant behavior described above. This patch also
removes the `inline_block_overflow.html` reftest introduced in servo#3725, as
the behavior it expected contradicted CSS 2.1 (and in fact the test
fails in Gecko).

The changes that this patch makes to `input_selection_a.html` and
`input_selection_incremental_a.html` are necessary workarounds to make
the tests pass in light of the fact that Servo's UA stylesheet applies
`overflow: hidden` to `<input>` elements. I believe that the changes are
not necessary in other rendering engines because they hard-code
`overflow: hidden`-like behavior for `<input>` elements, while Servo
uses the actual CSS `overflow: hidden` behavior. As far as I can tell,
Servo's behavior is arguably more spec-compliant, but it remains to be
seen how Web compatible it is.

Improves the Google results pages.

Closes servo#13707.

bors-servo added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 13, 2016

Auto merge of #13732 - pcwalton:inline-block-vertical-align-overflow,…
… r=notriddle

layout: Use the margin box for vertical positioning of `inline-block` fragments if `overflow` is not `visible` per CSS 2.1 § 10.8.1.

Additionally, this patch reverts the change introduced in #12642 in
favor of the spec-compliant behavior described above. This patch also
removes the `inline_block_overflow.html` reftest introduced in #3725, as
the behavior it expected contradicted CSS 2.1 (and in fact the test
fails in Gecko).

The changes that this patch makes to `input_selection_a.html` and
`input_selection_incremental_a.html` are necessary workarounds to make
the tests pass in light of the fact that Servo's UA stylesheet applies
`overflow: hidden` to `<input>` elements. I believe that the changes are
not necessary in other rendering engines because they hard-code
`overflow: hidden`-like behavior for `<input>` elements, while Servo
uses the actual CSS `overflow: hidden` behavior. As far as I can tell,
Servo's behavior is arguably more spec-compliant, but it remains to be
seen how Web compatible it is.

Improves the Google results pages.

Closes #13707.

r? @notriddle

<!-- Reviewable:start -->
---
This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="34" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/13732)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
5 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.