| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
|
|
Fixes a row height bug when a grid item in a row has a definite height.
|
|
CSS properties generated by presentational hints in content attributes
should not leak into pseudo elements.
|
|
An element's inline style, if present, should not leak into any pseudo
elements generated by that element.
|
|
The intrinsic aspect ratio of a box is a width:height ratio, so if we
have the width and need the height, we should divide, not multiply. :^)
|
|
|
|
Due to CSSImportRule::has_import_result() being backwards, we never
actually entered imported style sheets when traversing style rules or
media queries.
With this fixed, we no longer need the "collect style sheets" step in
StyleComputer, as normal for_each_effective_style_rule() will now
actually find all the rules. :^)
|
|
...instead of not resolving them at all. :^)
|
|
In situations where we need a width to calculate the intrinsic height of
a flex item, we use the fit-content width as a stand-in. However, we
also need to clamp it to any min-width and max-width properties present.
|
|
Adds a layout test for the fix in 488a979.
|
|
In `flex-direction: column` layouts, a flex item's intrinsic height may
depend on its width, but the width is calculated *after* the intrinsic
height is required.
Unfortunately, the specification doesn't tell us exactly what to do here
(missing inputs to intrinsic sizing is a common problem) so we take the
solution that flexbox applies in 9.2.3.C and apply it to all intrinsic
height calculations within FlexFormattingContext: if the used width of
an item is not yet known when its intrinsic height is requested, we
substitute the fit-content width instead.
Note that while this is technically ad-hoc, it's basically extrapolating
the spec's suggestion in one specific case and using it in all cases.
|
|
Early return before running full TFC algorithm is only possible when
just table width need to be calculated.
|
|
This case is important because we have to clamp the width before using
it to determine the auto height.
|
|
|
|
We have to clamp the resulting height to 0 when solving for it.
|
|
We have to clamp the resulting width to 0 when solving for it.
|
|
If the previous sibling of an out-of-flow box has been wrapped in an
anonymous block, we now stuff the out-of-flow box into the anonymous
block as well.
Co-authored-by: Aliaksandr Kalenik <kalenik.aliaksandr@gmail.com>
|
|
This builds on the existing ad-hoc ResourceLoader code for HTTP fetches
which works for files as well.
This also includes a test that checks that stylesheets loaded with the
"file" URL scheme actually work.
|
|
This would previously assert in InlineFormattingContext because we had
an outwardly inline box that wasn't inwardly flow.
Fix this by converting text-based input boxes to inline-blocks. This is
an ad-hoc solution, and there might be a much better way to solve it.
|
|
Before this change `apply_clip_overflow_rect` might crash trying to
access `clip_rect` that does not have value because we currently
support calculation of visible rectangle when `overflow: hidden`
is applied for both axis.
|
|
|
|
This fixes an issue where e.g `height: 100%` on a flex item whose
container has indefinite height was being resolved to 0. It now
correctly behaves the same as auto.
|
|
Previously, when having inline contexts consisting of just a `<br/>`
tag, we would not create a line box.
Ensure that there is always a line box when a line is explicitly being
broken and also ensure it won't be trimmed due to being empty.
This will a fix a number of sites that use `<br>` tags for layouts
between block elements (even though the spec says they shouldn't).
|
|
This will help us catch any future regressions immediately.
|
|
|
|
The image made the test flaky when running on my machine, so this
doesn't seem safe at the moment. We can just hardcode the dimensions.
Eventually we should make it possible to use external images in tests,
but for now let's not flake up the CI.
|
|
According to CSS Inline Layout Module Level 3 ยง 2.2 Step 1. atomic
inlines should be layed out in a line box based on their margin box.
However, up until this patch we were unconditionally considering only
the border box during line box height calculation. This made us
essentially drop all vertical margins for atomic inlines.
|
|
Percentage line-height values are relative to 1em (i.e the font-size
of the element). We have to resolve their computed values before
proceeding with inheritance.
|
|
|
|
If normal flow layout has caused us to progress past the current
innermost float in the block axis, we still need to consider the floats
stacked outside of it.
Fix this by always walking the currently stacked floats from innermost
to outermost when placing new floats.
|
|
When using the flex shrink factor, the flexible length resolution
algorithm was incorrectly ignoring the `frozen` flag on items and would
update the same items again, causing overconsumption of the remaining
free space on the flex line.
|
|
We had an issue where boxes with margin-left were shifted right by
left-side floats twice instead of just once.
|
|
In case flex items had `margin: auto` on the primary flex axis, we were
still also distributing remaining space according to `justify-content`
rules. This lead to duplicated spacing in various places and overflows.
It looks like this issue was observed previously but missidentified
because there was logic to ignore margins at the start and end which
would partially paper over the root cause. However this created other
bugs (like for example not having a margin at beginning and end ;-)) and
I can find nothing in the spec or other browser behaviour that indicates
that this is something that should be done.
Now we skip justify-content space distribution alltogether if it has
already been distributed to auto margins.
|
|
This ensures consistent font metrics no matter which platform fonts
are available.
|
|
The draft CSS-FLEXBOX-1 spec had a more detailed description of this
algorithm, so let's use that as our basis for the implementation.
Test by Aliaksandr. :^)
|
|
When resolving these constraints to CSS pixel sizes, we have to resolve
padding-top and padding-bottom against the flex container's *width*,
not its height.
|
|
The padding-top and padding-bottom properties are relative to the
*width* of the containing block, not the height.
It's funny how we keep making this same mistake again and again. :^)
|
|
|
|
If a box has clearance and margin bottom of preceding box is greater
than static y of the box then it should also affect y offset in current
block container so subsequent boxes will get correct y position too.
|
|
Though table wrappers are anonymous block containers (because
TableWrapper is inherited from BlockContainer) with no lines they
should not be skipped in block auto height calculation.
|
|
Those are copied from 'Base/res/html/misc/'.
|
|
|
