Closed Bug 1176 Opened 26 years ago Closed 26 years ago

there should be no scrollbars on this <IFRAME> example

Categories

(Core :: Layout, defect, P2)

Product:
Core
Component:
Layout
Platform:
x86
Windows NT
Type:
defect

Tracking

()

Status:
VERIFIED WORKSFORME

People

(Reporter: karnaze, Assigned: michaelp)

Details

In the following example the <IFRAME> is given a width less than specified (the <DIV> above it illustrates this). It appears that the width is being reduced by the size of a vertical scroll bar which is absent. This <iframe> should require no scrollbars at all, but if hypothetically it did require a horizontal scrollbar, then there should also be a vertical one as well, since the bottom of the <IFRAME> document is not reachable. Note that the scrolling=0 attribute in the <IFRAME> violates the spec and is not being honored. This is related to bug 998, which is being reassigned to cujo for table issues. ---- <html> <body> <DIV style="border: 1px solid black; width: 484px; height: 60px"></DIV> <IFRAME SRC="http://ad.doubleclick.net/adi/www.fastcompany.com/general;ord=4671911993" WIDTH=483 HEIGHT=60 MARGINWIDTH=0 MARGINHEIGHT=0 HSPACE=0 VSPACE=0 FRAMEBORDER=0 SCROLLING=0 BORDER="000000"><a target="outlink" href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/www.fastcompany.com/general;ord=4671911993" ></IFRAME> <a href="http://www.fastcompany.com/online/17/feedback.html">bug 998</a> </body> </html>
Summary: there should be no scrollbars on this <IFRAME> example
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
I have other IFRAME woes, thanks to slashdot. They use iframe for their ad at the top of the page, and it has a scrollbar attached to it...I took the code and shrunk it down.....http://mozilla.asimov.net/ngl/bugs/iframe.html , screenshots and other items are in that directory....
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 26 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
the example *does* need both scrollbars as far as i can tell (and now it has them).
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Greetings from QA land- This bug has been reopened. michaelp did you 'fix' anything or are you simply trying to say this bug was invalid in the first place? I'm not sure it matters anyway. For starters the ads in this example are 485 pixels wide. So, if the <IFRAME> is given a width of 483, yes it will require scrollbars. That behavior seems correct. It also displays at the correct width. *However*, if you change the width of the <IFRAME> to 485, the scrollbars disappear like they should but now the ad is too skinny! Too skinny by the exact width of the nonexistent vertical scroll bar. The <DIV> is exactly 486 pixels wide (the specified 484 plus 1px border) so the <IFRAME> should be just 1 px shy in width but it's not. That's the real bug here. The best way to convince yourself is to view it(the <IFRAME>) at 484px and then 485px, that's where the diffs are apparent.
adding myself to cc list
installing myself as QA Contact for sevaral bugs at once
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 26 years ago → 26 years ago
Component: Rendering → Layout
Resolution: FIXED → WORKSFORME
This would be a layout bug and not a rendering bug. It looks fine to me with the latest build. Marking WORKSFORME, because there have been many changes over the past couple of months and it's difficult which changes had what effect If you re-open the bug, don't open it as a rendering bug...
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
verified worksforme
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.