RESOLVED FIXED 166294
Web Inspector: Fix Content Flow Container Regions Computed Style section
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=166294
Summary Web Inspector: Fix Content Flow Container Regions Computed Style section
Joseph Pecoraro
Reported 2016-12-20 15:31:27 PST
Summary: Fix Content Flow Computed Style section These LayoutTests were consistently failing, but only noticeable if you --force because they are marked [Pass Timeout]: LayoutTests/inspector/dom/content-flow-list.html LayoutTests/inspector/dom/content-node-region-info.html One looks like a testing issue (domTree is not updated across navigation). The other looks like a legit issue that can be addressed. Steps to Reproduce: 1. Inspect div#flow on LayoutTests/inspector/dom/content-node-region-info.html 2. Show Styles > Computed Styles sidebar => Expected Container Regions section for the regions it flows into
Attachments
[PATCH] Proposed Fix (9.13 KB, patch)
2016-12-20 15:34 PST, Joseph Pecoraro
bburg: review+
Joseph Pecoraro
Comment 1 2016-12-20 15:34:06 PST
Created attachment 297562 [details] [PATCH] Proposed Fix
Blaze Burg
Comment 2 2016-12-21 10:25:50 PST
Comment on attachment 297562 [details] [PATCH] Proposed Fix View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=297562&action=review r=me > LayoutTests/ChangeLog:8 > + * inspector/dom/content-flow-list.html: Should we try to unskip this test now? > Source/WebInspectorUI/UserInterface/Controllers/DOMTreeManager.js:663 > + functionDeclaration: appendWebInspectorSourceURL(inspectedPage_node_getFlowInfo.toString()), I like this name. I updated the style guide to document this convention.
Joseph Pecoraro
Comment 3 2017-01-03 12:03:04 PST
(In reply to comment #2) > Comment on attachment 297562 [details] > [PATCH] Proposed Fix > > View in context: > https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=297562&action=review > > r=me > > > LayoutTests/ChangeLog:8 > > + * inspector/dom/content-flow-list.html: > > Should we try to unskip this test now? I'll leave this up to you as you start investigating the tests. It should be okay but we had "random failures" in the past which wouldn't account for these deterministic failures.
Joseph Pecoraro
Comment 4 2017-01-03 14:32:45 PST
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.