Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Anyone else running into this Mozilla/Firefox layout bug?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Anyone else running into this Mozilla/Firefox layout bug?

    I'm just wanting a show of hands if anyone else is running afoul of Mozilla bug 312688 when they browse various pages on AW.com?

    It's an intermittent problem that I've been having for a year or so now, whenever I browse the main, gallery and image pages.

    Basically what happens is the outermost anonymous div element that contains the main content of the page, despite having a CSS-specified height of 100% (meaning "take up the full height of the page body"), instead only gets sized as large as the viewport, causing the page footer to appear on top of the content; see the first screenshot for an example.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	aw_members_page_mozilla_bug_312688.png
Views:	1
Size:	58.2 KB
ID:	657540

    Another side-effect is that the left schedule box and menus appear in the wrong font; both appear as Verdana rather than Trebuchet (see second screenshot).

    Click image for larger version

Name:	aw_members_page_mozilla_bug_312688_menu.png
Views:	1
Size:	9.1 KB
ID:	657541

    I suspect it's most likely a race condition, since it only shows up when the page is being downloaded over a slow link (like my 28.8kbps phone line). It seems Gecko's layout engine is most likely determining the final size of the div element too soon, before the rest of the content has finished loading. If I use the back button (reloading from cache) or save the page to disk locally and view it from there, then the problem doesn't show up.

    Since there's some apparent disagreement on the Bugzilla page, with some people claiming "it works for them" (presumably because they have broadband), I'm contemplating if I should go to the effort of fixing it myself and submitting a patch (since I can reliably reproduce the problem). I'd just like to see a show of interest if anyone else would also benefit from my efforts?

    #2
    Hi Diablo,
    I use Firefox exclusively and I haven't noticed any problems although in all honestly, your pic of the news page is too small for me to see at this resolution on my notebook (it's rather high) and I tried to change it down once and Windows said it didn't recommend changing the resolution so I didn't. As far as the font goes on the left bar, I didn't know it should have been different so I didn't know any different.
    Do these problems effect us?

    Alleyes

    Comment


      #3
      diablo, VidDude and Willow will be along shortly, but I am interested to know what res you're running at, and if you're using larger fonts for any reason?

      You schedule table looks awful to me - does it always look like that, or is it part of this bug you're describing?

      a

      Comment


        #4
        Interesting how you say it only appears with a slow connection. It seems to be loading the different CSS files in the wrong order, I suppose, though as the main content is also the one that specifies the whole three column layout, that seems awfully odd.

        Comment


          #5
          I should mention that the screenshots were taken at 1024x768, I've merely downsized the first one to avoid wrecking the forum layout. You don't need to read the text in it, I was just intending to highlight the layout error.

          This apparently affects Mozilla and Firefox under all platforms. I'm using Mozilla 1.7.12 under Linux (RH 7.2, XFree86 4.1.0). My Windows 2000 installation is broken at the moment, but I could see if the problems are reproduced there.

          Comment


            #6
            here's what mine looks like in IE (same in FF). (nb, I saved down to 256 colour gif for this shot)

            a
            Attached Files

            Comment


              #7
              Diablo, can you PM me a dump of the page source next time you see that problem? Thanks.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Diablo
                My Windows 2000 installation is broken at the moment ...
                Is there any other way for Win2K installation to be???

                Comment


                  #9
                  hey diablo, can you please e me, abby@abbywinters.com ?

                  thanks

                  a

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Abby
                    diablo, VidDude and Willow will be along shortly, but I am interested to know what res you're running at, and if you're using larger fonts for any reason?
                    No, using standard fonts, text zoom is at 100%.

                    Originally posted by Abby
                    You schedule table looks awful to me - does it always look like that, or is it part of this bug you're describing?
                    No, it only looks like this when the layout bug occurs. I believe it's a race condition bug; if the content loads quick enough before Gecko calculates the height of the content div box, then the page appears correct as intended.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by willow
                      Is there any other way for Win2K installation to be???
                      Didn't see a smiley Willow.

                      Alleyes

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by alleyes1
                        Didn't see a smiley Willow.
                        There needn't be one... right, Willow?

                        I'd rather not turn this into a Microsoft-bashing thread; please keep things on topic if you can... PM me otherwise...

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Was there something funny in what I said???

                          I don't hate Windows and Win2K is a major improvement over NT4, but XP beats it hands down.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            ... back on topic: we will certainly be looking into this, but we can't give an ETA at this stage...

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Willow,
                              Signing off tonight (here). Think you do an outstanding job.
                              (People do notice how great this site is, and I can only imagine how many hours you put in.)
                              Take care brother,
                              Alleyes

                              Comment


                                #16
                                Originally posted by willow
                                ... back on topic: we will certainly be looking into this, but we can't give an ETA at this stage...
                                I presume you're looking at coding a workaround on the website?

                                I'd like to mention that I'd be happy to put up with this issue if needed (it's not stopping me from viewing the site content)... after all it's a fault with Mozilla/FF, not the site. Don't pull your hair out over it if you can help it, if there's other things deserving of more priority.

                                Thanks for your efforts though, Willow, much appreciated

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  Update: I've just booted into Windows 2000, and managed to reproduce the same fault in Mozilla 1.7.12.

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by Diablo
                                    I presume you're looking at coding a workaround on the website?
                                    What I'll try is working with Vid Dude to redo the page layout without needing the "height:100%" property. I'm thinking that there should be a cleaner way of achieving the same thing that doesn't trip the Gecko bug.

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      i have a bug..... swatttt now its dead

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        Originally posted by stoneyyy
                                        i have a bug..... swatttt now its dead
                                        Good. Now run it through regression testing, create a patch, fill out the Quality Assurance forms, and check it into CVS. And don't break the build!

                                        Comment

                                        Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter

                                         
                                        Sign up for the abby newsletter. Don't worry, we'll NEVER share your email address with anyone.
                                        Working...
                                        X