| Summary: | [MathML] Make RenderMathMLOperator synthetic children should be anonymous | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | Julien Chaffraix <jchaffraix> | ||||
| Component: | Layout and Rendering | Assignee: | Julien Chaffraix <jchaffraix> | ||||
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||||||
| Severity: | Normal | CC: | alex, bfulgham, dbarton, eric, fred.wang, inferno, ojan | ||||
| Priority: | P2 | ||||||
| Version: | 528+ (Nightly build) | ||||||
| Hardware: | All | ||||||
| OS: | All | ||||||
| Bug Depends on: | 155018 | ||||||
| Bug Blocks: | |||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
Julien Chaffraix
2012-12-05 16:37:08 PST
They weren't forgotten. One problem is that I'd heard anonymous blocks shouldn't have layers, though I could never find out why. The MathML wrappers change to mostly anonymous was in bug 88476. (In reply to comment #1) > They weren't forgotten. One problem is that I'd heard anonymous blocks shouldn't have layers, though I could never find out why. That's my fault for saying that. My apologies. I will post a patch to make them fully anonymous, feel free to push back if this looks wrong. Created attachment 177880 [details]
Proposed change.
No apologies necessary. Can anonymous renderers have layers? What exactly is the problem? Is it ok for anonymous flexboxes, just not "anonymous blocks" introduced by RenderBlock? I am worried because this wrapper may have a layer. I will have to go back and look to see if there's another reason I didn't make these truly anonymous. > Can anonymous renderers have layers? Nothing really prevents an anonymous renderer to have a layer as the decision to have / not have one is based on the style and in some rare cases on the parent (see bug 91405 for example). All of the properties generating a layer (e.g. opacity or transform) are not inherited so this case doesn't happen usually. > What exactly is the problem? This is the type of problem that arise if we relax the restriction: http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/111439. This is what prompted me to say that would should probably hold off making more anonymous renderers with layers. Reading back, this was an isolated bug so I over-reacted - though we have to be mindful of the probable badness. As we have proper coverage these days, we should probably try it to see if something actually breaks. > Is it ok for anonymous flexboxes, just not "anonymous blocks" introduced by RenderBlock? I am worried because this wrapper may have a layer. One wrapper will have a layer as we set overflow: hidden on it. Looks great to me.
The other place with "almost anonymous" renderers is RenderMathMLFenced.cpp. You could change:
RenderMathMLOperator* newOperator = new (renderArena()) RenderMathMLOperator(node() /* "almost anonymous" */, uChar);
to use document() instead of node(). You'd then need to change RenderMathMLFenced::styleDidChange to make sure it applied the special margins to its anonymous children. (The FIXME saying to just remove RenderMathMLFenced::styleDidChange is outdated.) Or if you wait until the MathML operator dictionary is implemented (which gives default margins for all standard operators), these special margins and RenderMathMLFenced::styleDidChange could just be removed.
What's the status on this bug? Looks like it was approved but never landed. I'm sure it's out-of-sync with the archive now, but do we still want to take this? (In reply to comment #8) > What's the status on this bug? Looks like it was approved but never landed. > I'm sure it's out-of-sync with the archive now, but do we still want to take > this? @Brent: This will probably be obsolete after bug 155018, where we remove the need for anonymous renderers for MathML token elements. |