[WSG] another update - ie bug - content disappears on hover
The Guillotine is an interesting approach. I tried the clearing divs, but
that didn't solve the problem. I wish I could set up a generic example, but
it would take me too long to do the entire page. I'll see if I can duplicate
the issue with just the highlighted section.
Here's an update. When I put height:1% on the hovers, the problem
disappears, however, now the content is disappearing when the mouse is
clicked. I tried putting (a:active {height:1%}) and/or (a {height:1%}) with
no effect.
If I solve this, do I get to name a new hack/bug after myself? I've been
wanting to see the 7mary4 hack hit the airwaves for at least the last few
days.
Ted
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ingo Chao
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 10:18 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] ie bug - content disappears on hover
Drake, Ted C. schrieb:
When you mouse over some of these divs, the content disappears and the
background color appears. It's like you are erasing it in blocks.
http://positioniseverything.net/explorer/guillotine.html
In case it is not the guillotine, you could provide an URL to a
simplified test case.
Ingo
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] another update - ie bug - content disappears on hover
Drake, Ted C. schrieb:
... I wish I could set up a generic example, but
it would take me too long to do the entire page. I'll see if I can duplicate
the issue with just the highlighted section.
That would be a good approach.
Here's an update. When I put height:1% on the hovers, the problem
disappears, however, now the content is disappearing when the mouse is
clicked. I tried putting (a:active {height:1%}) and/or (a {height:1%}) with
no effect.
As mentioned before, we can't analyze it without an URL to a test case.
IE does reflow the container and its childs on a :hover-transition with
any change of the background. I have written that somewhere.
If I solve this, do I get to name a new hack/bug after myself?
When someone describes a bug, he usually does try to summarize the
problem in a few words or some kind of abstraction like The Guillotine
which fits in a h1. But I think there is nothing wrong with Drake's
Bug in principle. For some reasons, I personally wouldn't prefer this
naming, but probably Chaos Bug would describe the named situation in
IE6 correctly for sure.
The hack might get the name of the author/describer of the original, but
by convention others do name it. But in this case, the hack was
developed some years ago: for a better understanding (since I've read
someone refers to the holy hack the other day), see Ten Questions for
John Gallant:
The well-known Holly hack was invented by this same Holly Bergevin. She
prefers to stay out of the spotlight, so I had to insist we call it the
Holly hack, over her objections I might add. Unknown to us, Doug
Bowman had also come up with the idea, but as he had not yet published
it I was able to affix Holly's name to the hack. Anyway, it sounds so
much better than The IE-improper-box-enlarging-to-trigger-layout hack.
(cited from http://webstandardsgroup.org/features/john-gallant.cfm a
good read about the bughunting process, or, the art of bughunting.)
I think when you have developed that height:1% hack too, it's a great
piece of work. But: when you don't bring it to paper, your bug
description will be lost like the timemachine, fuel-less car and p. mobile.
One important thing is to try your best (shame on me) to make it clear
to understand under which circumstances the bug appears, so you'll have
to sit down, read the relevant sources, and compile a nice demo after
some testing.
Ingo
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
RE: [WSG] another update - ie bug - content disappears on hover
Hi Ingo,
Thank you for the help so far. I have been trying more theories. The Holly
hack for the guillotine or peekaboo bug, which seemed to be the closest, are
not helping.
I've been able to create a generic version of the site and placed it on my
personal server: http://tdrake.net/generic-test.html
On the right side, you will see a section with an expandable menu. This has
the most predictable problems. If you hover over the + signs, the background
will turn dark blue. If you click on a link, it will turn blue. Some of the
divs in the right section will sometimes turn blue as well.
Thanks
Ted
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ingo Chao
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 12:20 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] another update - ie bug - content disappears on hover
Drake, Ted C. schrieb:
... I wish I could set up a generic example, but
it would take me too long to do the entire page. I'll see if I can
duplicate
the issue with just the highlighted section.
That would be a good approach.
Here's an update. When I put height:1% on the hovers, the problem
disappears, however, now the content is disappearing when the mouse is
clicked. I tried putting (a:active {height:1%}) and/or (a {height:1%})
with
no effect.
As mentioned before, we can't analyze it without an URL to a test case.
IE does reflow the container and its childs on a :hover-transition with
any change of the background. I have written that somewhere.
If I solve this, do I get to name a new hack/bug after myself?
When someone describes a bug, he usually does try to summarize the
problem in a few words or some kind of abstraction like The Guillotine
which fits in a h1. But I think there is nothing wrong with Drake's
Bug in principle. For some reasons, I personally wouldn't prefer this
naming, but probably Chaos Bug would describe the named situation in
IE6 correctly for sure.
The hack might get the name of the author/describer of the original, but
by convention others do name it. But in this case, the hack was
developed some years ago: for a better understanding (since I've read
someone refers to the holy hack the other day), see Ten Questions for
John Gallant:
The well-known Holly hack was invented by this same Holly Bergevin. She
prefers to stay out of the spotlight, so I had to insist we call it the
Holly hack, over her objections I might add. Unknown to us, Doug
Bowman had also come up with the idea, but as he had not yet published
it I was able to affix Holly's name to the hack. Anyway, it sounds so
much better than The IE-improper-box-enlarging-to-trigger-layout hack.
(cited from http://webstandardsgroup.org/features/john-gallant.cfm a
good read about the bughunting process, or, the art of bughunting.)
I think when you have developed that height:1% hack too, it's a great
piece of work. But: when you don't bring it to paper, your bug
description will be lost like the timemachine, fuel-less car and p. mobile.
One important thing is to try your best (shame on me) to make it clear
to understand under which circumstances the bug appears, so you'll have
to sit down, read the relevant sources, and compile a nice demo after
some testing.
Ingo
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
