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

"javascript:" urls: add web-platform-test #7614

Closed

Conversation

servo-wpt-sync
Copy link
Collaborator

@servo-wpt-sync servo-wpt-sync commented Oct 6, 2017

Upstreamed from servo/servo#17083 [ci skip]

pyfisch and others added 6 commits October 6, 2017 13:24
CSS-gradients should not only cover the content of an
element but also the padding (but not the border).

Add a reftest.

Upstreamed from servo/servo#17395 [ci skip]
We already call Document::invalidate_style_sheets and set
the stylesheet member to a new Stylesheet. This matches the behavior of
Firefox, and means the new CSSStyleSheet you get from accessing .sheet
from JS will be correct instead of stale.

(::get_cssom_stylesheet already tries to use the new Stylesheet, but
MutNullableJS::or_init is called, so if we already created a
CSSStyleSheet we will continue to return that one).

Upstreamed from servo/servo#17259 [ci skip]
We parse when assigning using the namespaces of the stylesheet. It isn't
clear if the spec says to do that (Firefox doesn't support the setter at
all, Chrome does, Safari doesn't); the spec issue is here:
w3c/csswg-drafts#1511

Also fix ToCss implementation of AttrSelectorOperator to not pad with
spaces, to conform with CSSOM. This means we have to update some unit
tests that expect operators with spaces around them in attribute
selectors to roundtrip.

See the "attribute selector" section of "Serializing Selectors" here:
https://drafts.csswg.org/cssom/#serializing-selectors

CSSStyleRule.selectorText is specified here:
https://drafts.csswg.org/cssom/#dom-cssstylerule-selectortext

Upstreamed from servo/servo#17538 [ci skip]
@servo-wpt-sync
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Code reviewed upstream.

@jdm jdm deleted the sync_1ceeee7bb2a1d350d31eb9849083acf607f4fe65 branch October 6, 2017 19:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants