So, 1. Gather relevant tickets together ... it would probably be best to merge them into one ticket because then we can eliminate duplicates.. 2. List all of the CSS attributes & DOM properties relating to element positions. 3. Create test pages that contains elements positioned in every possible way. 3. In lib.js: ....i) Replace getViewOffset() with getBoundingClientRect() ...ii) Remove any special cases that are no longer needed.
It seems like the vital things here are patience and having good test pages that cover as many situations as possible ... e.g. more than 1 page is necessary to test different offsets. Paul, you are more than welcome to help with any of these points ... I will start with point 1. -Mike Ratcliffe johnjbarton wrote: > There are two parts to fixing this bug. > > First we need a comprehensive test case including all of the ways > boxes can be positioned by CSS and Javascript. For example this could > be a web page or two listing the cases with reference to the standard > or description of the feature used for positioning and instructions on > which box to test. Some resources for finding all of the cases include > the CSS standard, Mozilla's test suite, Webkit's test suite, various > tutorial sites, and the six or so Firebug issues that report this > problem. > > Second the code in Firebug's lib.js for getViewOffset() needs to be > replaced by code using getBoundingClientRect() (see issue 68, > http://code.google.com/p/fbug/issues/detail?id=68. This has two kinds > of difficulty 1) sorting out the coordinate systems, 2) verifying that > all of the special cases in the current code are/are not needed. With > the test case from above, the verification should be easy. > > The first part needs no Firebug code experience, but it does require > diligence to look for all of the cases. Inspect is such an important > part of Firebug that getting this right would be a huge contribution. > If someone or multiple folks come up with a test case, I'll come up > with the coding part (Mike Radcliffe may be able to help with this > part). > > jjb > > > > On Apr 20, 9:07 pm, ptarjan <[email protected]> wrote: > > Can I help? This is rather annoying for my site. Where is the code > > path? > > > > On Apr 15, 8:52 pm, johnjbarton <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Sounds like a very old > > > bug:http://code.google.com/p/fbug/issues/detail?id=68 > > > I know how to fix this now, just not gotten to it. > > > > > jjb > > > > > On Apr 15, 6:14 pm,ptarjan<[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Visit this page:http://paul.slowgeek.com/webGrapher/ > > > > Open firebug > > > > Hover over any of the nodes and see the highlighting in the screen is > > > > not overtop of the nodes. > > > > > > The page is valid XHTML 1.0 Strict, and the CSS validator is down > > > > right now I don't know how valid it is. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
