WebKit Bugzilla
New
Browse
Log In
×
Sign in with GitHub
or
Remember my login
Create Account
·
Forgot Password
Forgotten password account recovery
RESOLVED FIXED
13976
getPresentationAttribute not implemented
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13976
Summary
getPresentationAttribute not implemented
Rob Buis
Reported
2007-06-02 01:20:08 PDT
SVGStylable::getPresentationAttribute is not implemented either in code or bindings.
Attachments
Work in progress
(5.70 KB, patch)
2007-06-02 01:43 PDT
,
Rob Buis
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Patch including layout test
(11.43 KB, patch)
2007-06-03 03:31 PDT
,
Rob Buis
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Improved patch
(29.93 KB, patch)
2007-06-06 01:48 PDT
,
Rob Buis
eric
: review+
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Show Obsolete
(2)
View All
Add attachment
proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Rob Buis
Comment 1
2007-06-02 01:43:38 PDT
Created
attachment 14838
[details]
Work in progress The patch works fine except the objC bindings fail. Do not apply the patch yet or make sure only js bindings for getPresentationAttribute. Once the bindings are fixed this should be a simple review. Cheers, Rob.
Sam Weinig
Comment 2
2007-06-02 12:56:44 PDT
To get the bindings to work you need to touch both CodeGeneratorObjC.pm and CodeGeneratorJS.pm to make sure all of the bindings are rebuilt. This is needed because we are changing an idl that effects only its subclasses and we don't have any dependancy analysis in the system to notify the correct classes to regenerate in this case.
Rob Buis
Comment 3
2007-06-03 03:31:16 PDT
Created
attachment 14846
[details]
Patch including layout test Given Sam's comments, I think it is valid to make this reviewable. Cheers, Rob.
Eric Seidel (no email)
Comment 4
2007-06-04 11:19:35 PDT
Comment on
attachment 14846
[details]
Patch including layout test This check seems unnecessary: + if (SVGStyledElement::cssPropertyIdForSVGAttributeName(cssSVGAttr->name()) <= 0) + return 0; It's very possible that SVG elements could be carrying style from non-SVG attributes. I don't see why we would want to intentionally disable access to these properties via this call. Using CDATA blocks is probably easier to read than &amp; ;) The test would also be clearer if it was 3 checks instead of one check for 3 things. You also don't test mutability as the spec requires. I think the code looks OK, but the test should be improved before landing.
Rob Buis
Comment 5
2007-06-06 01:48:59 PDT
Created
attachment 14877
[details]
Improved patch This one should be better. Cheers, Rob.
Eric Seidel (no email)
Comment 6
2007-06-06 01:55:40 PDT
Comment on
attachment 14877
[details]
Improved patch Looks good.
Sam Weinig
Comment 7
2007-06-08 16:37:30 PDT
Landed in feature branch in
r22025
.
Note
You need to
log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Top of Page
Format For Printing
XML
Clone This Bug