We should consider step and step base when deciding whether to show second and
millisecond field, since step and step base can affect the valid time intervals,
and the valid intervals may have second/millisecond part.
MozReview-Commit-ID: H4mJvLTvBOM
Annoyingly, setting the pref doesn't magically make the function appear on the
current window, so we create an iframe and retrieve it from there.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 9fOr4YJOzXh
--HG--
extra : rebase_source : d23643b388538955cc831a3b6e1473232ab5498a
If all fields in date/time input box are available but the input element's
value is empty, implies that it has been sanitized. In this case, we'll set the
'bad input' validity state. If any of the fields is cleared, we'll remove the
'bad input' validity state, as incomplete field does not imply 'bad input'.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 4EBpH5CWqXM
Move the data URI in 'if_no_scripts' and 'if_scripts' to seperate files.
Also remove the test 'if_19', as it seems redundant, it tests the same
thing with the iframe 'if_scripts', and it also lacks of 'allow-scripts'
in its sandbox flag.
Per spec [1], date/time inputs fall into this category:
"For input elements without a defined input activation behavior, but to which
these events apply, and for which the user interface involves an explicit
commit action but no intermediate manipulation, then any time the user commits
a change to the element's value, the user agent must queue a task to first fire
an event named input at the input element, with the bubbles attribute
initialized to true, and then fire an event named change at the input element,
with the bubbles attribute initialized to true."
So, we fire input/change events when:
- User selects a date/time from the picker
- User changes the value using up/down keys in a already complete date/time
value
- User changes the value using the number keyboard in a already complete
date/time value
- User clears the value (using reset button or using backspace)
MozReview-Commit-ID: E7Jc5qMKZj4
--HG--
extra : rebase_source : 01d4ddbf97d7cef626491946e008a88db4641258
This bug fixes this statement in the spec (https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-option):
If selected is true, then set option's selectedness to true; otherwise set its
selectedness to false (even if defaultSelected is true).
And also reset the dirtiness.
This patch also reverts the changes in Bug 927796 and 942648, which was added
because IsSelected() returned inaccurately (called from SelectSomething()).
Verified that the tests added in Bug 927796 and 942648 do pass.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 8PVgvCIHPj4
This patch implements:
. noModule getter/setter for HTMLScriptElement
. the nomodule attribute for HTMLScriptElement
. and the logic in nsScriptLoader that denies the loading of a nomodule script
. with tests
This code only became dead very recently; in the first patch improving this
issue (which fixed an underlying issue with the code, but not the tests).
r=baku
MozReview-Commit-ID: 3QP5LrNPstJ
--HG--
extra : rebase_source : 845856d77640cf94b074dc0b9f976ae1a1fb927a
nsIFilePicker.displaySpecialDirectory is a string that can be set to TmpD,
Desk, or any other special directory value. The real value of this directory
will be read in the parent process.
Since the inner fields of date/time input are now <span> instead of <input>
text, we are adding an API for binding code to set the focus state of the
bound input element when inner fields are focused/blurred.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 9wvu57xT6HZ
--HG--
extra : rebase_source : c6c3832fe0aa0fe9429052dcb5b15a3497c33fa4
When adding support for RTL in date/time input box, we noticed that bidi text
was not displayed properly with mixed of inline and block elements. By
changing our editabled fields from <input> to <span>, we can rely on bidi
algorithm and markups to display the inner fields in the right order.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 7r8OVSJXJRU
--HG--
extra : rebase_source : b130a5424b533930a57695a65196454c72d7be10
Before this change, if you did formatBlock on "a<span
contenteditable=false>b</span>c", it would become "acb", because the "a"
and "c" would be moved to the front of the node, and the "b" would be
left alone at the end because the editing code doesn't want to move it.
Now we will move the "b" as well, even though it's not editable, so that
the node remains "abc". The rule is that a non-editable element cannot
have its attributes or children changed, but it can have its parent
changed, so there's nothing wrong with moving it here.
On the way, I fixed an exception in insert*List if there was an
uneditable inline node around. I don't intend to fix all the todo's in
the test, but now it should have better coverage, at least.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 3okcGq4an3f
These prefs have been added close to two years ago:
dom.url.encode_decode_hash and dom.url.getters_decode_hash
The main reason for their existence was in case we encounter any web-compat issues. At this point the extra code is mostly useless, and flipping the pref may lead to crashes.
MozReview-Commit-ID: LhAHkYmv0TR
--HG--
extra : rebase_source : 8f2d50d5633496cf165b3925d952bb6475bce3e0
This patch is generated by the following sed script:
find . ! -wholename '*/.hg*' -type f \( -iname '*.html' -o -iname '*.xhtml' -o -iname '*.xul' -o -iname '*.js' \) -exec sed -i -e 's/\(\(text\|application\)\/javascript\);version=1.[0-9]/\1/g' {} \;
MozReview-Commit-ID: AzhtdwJwVNg
--HG--
extra : rebase_source : e8f90249454c0779d926f87777f457352961748d
This is a terrible hack, asking input[type=range] in our video control
xbl binding content continue to handle mouse/touch event, even if the
event is being defaultPrevented by the content.
MozReview-Commit-ID: G1huxbS7oeq
--HG--
extra : rebase_source : 27153ce36e6883d947894da69dd9aca47965e99b
The Web-facing methods perform access checks which blow up when the
stars are aligned such that we run this code under a subject principal
that doesn't have access to the anchor node of the selection.
Otherwise, when a value="" attribute with a newline in it is copied, we
will strip any newlines even if type="hidden" is set, because type=""
hasn't yet been copied. Other bugs are likely too. This problem was
already solved for the parser, so we can just use that solution for
cloning too.
MozReview-Commit-ID: KqxCnxmxFXp
--HG--
extra : rebase_source : 9a666adad3dbbbaa5e3706747dcf70801b9ef4e8
There hasn't been any traction on this feature, and we keep
paying the maintenance and code size and memory usage penalty
of having this implementation.
We can revive this from VCS history in the future if we decide
to start working on it again. In the mean time, it's better
to remove it.
HSTS priming changes the order of mixed-content blocking and HSTS
upgrades, and adds a priming request to check if a mixed-content load is
accesible over HTTPS and the server supports upgrading via the
Strict-Transport-Security header.
Every call site that uses AsyncOpen2 passes through the mixed-content
blocker, and has a LoadInfo. If the mixed-content blocker marks the load as
needing HSTS priming, nsHttpChannel will build and send an HSTS priming
request on the same URI with the scheme upgraded to HTTPS. If the server
allows the upgrade, then channel performs an internal redirect to the HTTPS URI,
otherwise use the result of mixed-content blocker to allow or block the
load.
nsISiteSecurityService adds an optional boolean out parameter to
determine if the HSTS state is already cached for negative assertions.
If the host has been probed within the previous 24 hours, no HSTS
priming check will be sent.
MozReview-Commit-ID: ES1JruCtDdX
--HG--
extra : rebase_source : 2ac6c93c49f2862fc0b9e595eb0598cd1ea4bedf
This API has been deployed to release for some time. There isi
no longer value to being able to quickly disable it.
MozReview-Commit-ID: Jj6CyWzP93g
--HG--
extra : rebase_source : 2dc0547229b53865a4f7cfcf7ca417eb3dec0356
They are non-standard aliases for "DragEvent" and "KeyboardEvent" that
are not supported by any other UA, and we would like to drop support.
So first let's stop using them ourselves, so we can use telemetry to see
if any sites are using them.
MozReview-Commit-ID: ICC33ORa2st
The spec recently changed to match browsers better. There's currently
not much interop in exact details of how this work. This brings us in
line with the spec except for the limit of 1000 on the span attribute.
The added textarea failures are spurious, because I'm not updating our
local tests in this commit. The new tests are submitted upstream at
<https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/3518>.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 1L8aUtF47Qi
We want the maximum scroll position to be aligned with layer pixels. That way
we don't have to re-rasterize the scrolled contents once scrolling hits the
edge of the scrollable area.
Here's how we determine the maximum scroll position: We get the scroll port
rect, snapped to layer pixels. Then we get the scrolled rect and also snap
that to layer pixels. The maximum scroll position is set to the difference
between right/bottom edges of these rectangles.
Now the scrollable area is computed by adding this maximum scroll position
to the unsnapped scroll port size.
The underlying idea here is: Pretend we have overflow:visible so that the
scrolled contents start at (0, 0) relative to the scroll port and spill over
the scroll port edges. When these contents are rendered, their rendering is
snapped to layer pixels. We want those exact pixels to be accessible by
scrolling.
This way of computing the snapped scrollable area ensures that, if you scroll
to the maximum scroll position, the right/bottom edges of the rendered
scrolled contents line up exactly with the right/bottom edges of the scroll
port. The scrolled contents are neither cut off nor are they moved too far.
(This is something that no other browser engine gets completely right, see the
testcase in bug 1012752.)
There are also a few disadvantages to this solution. We snap to layer pixels,
and the size of a layer pixel can depend on the zoom level, the document
resolution, the current screen's scale factor, and CSS transforms. The snap
origin is the position of the reference frame. So a change to any of these
things can influence the scrollable area and the maximum scroll position.
This patch does not make us adjust the current scroll position in the event
that the maximum scroll position changes such that the current scroll position
would be out of range, unless there's a reflow of the scrolled contents. This
means that we can sometimes render a slightly inconsistent state where the
current scroll position exceeds the maximum scroll position. We can fix this
once it turns out to be a problem; I doubt that it will be a problem because
none of the other browsers seems to prevent this problem either.
The size of the scrollable area is exposed through the DOM properties
scrollWidth and scrollHeight. At the moment, these are integer properties, so
their value is rounded to the nearest CSS pixel. Before this patch, the
returned value would always be within 0.5 CSS pixels of the value that layout
computed for the content's scrollable overflow based on the CSS styles of the
contents.
Now that scrollWidth and scrollHeight also depend on pixel snapping, their
values can deviate by up to one layer pixel from what the page might expect
based on the styles of the contents. This change requires a few changes to
existing tests.
The fact that scrollWidth and scrollHeight can change based on the position of
the scrollable element and the zoom level / resolution may surprise some web
pages. However, this also seems to happen in Edge. Edge seems to always round
scrollWidth and scrollHeight upwards, possibly to their equivalent of layout
device pixels.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 3LFV7Lio4tG
--HG--
extra : rebase_source : 3e4e0b60493397e61283aa1d7fd93d7c197dec29
extra : source : d43c2d5e87f31ff47d7f3ada66c3f5f27cef84a9
We want the maximum scroll position to be aligned with layer pixels. That way
we don't have to re-rasterize the scrolled contents once scrolling hits the
edge of the scrollable area.
Here's how we determine the maximum scroll position: We get the scroll port
rect, snapped to layer pixels. Then we get the scrolled rect and also snap
that to layer pixels. The maximum scroll position is set to the difference
between right/bottom edges of these rectangles.
Now the scrollable area is computed by adding this maximum scroll position
to the unsnapped scroll port size.
The underlying idea here is: Pretend we have overflow:visible so that the
scrolled contents start at (0, 0) relative to the scroll port and spill over
the scroll port edges. When these contents are rendered, their rendering is
snapped to layer pixels. We want those exact pixels to be accessible by
scrolling.
This way of computing the snapped scrollable area ensures that, if you scroll
to the maximum scroll position, the right/bottom edges of the rendered
scrolled contents line up exactly with the right/bottom edges of the scroll
port. The scrolled contents are neither cut off nor are they moved too far.
(This is something that no other browser engine gets completely right, see the
testcase in bug 1012752.)
There are also a few disadvantages to this solution. We snap to layer pixels,
and the size of a layer pixel can depend on the zoom level, the document
resolution, the current screen's scale factor, and CSS transforms. The snap
origin is the position of the reference frame. So a change to any of these
things can influence the scrollable area and the maximum scroll position.
This patch does not make us adjust the current scroll position in the event
that the maximum scroll position changes such that the current scroll position
would be out of range, unless there's a reflow of the scrolled contents. This
means that we can sometimes render a slightly inconsistent state where the
current scroll position exceeds the maximum scroll position. We can fix this
once it turns out to be a problem; I doubt that it will be a problem because
none of the other browsers seems to prevent this problem either.
The size of the scrollable area is exposed through the DOM properties
scrollWidth and scrollHeight. At the moment, these are integer properties, so
their value is rounded to the nearest CSS pixel. Before this patch, the
returned value would always be within 0.5 CSS pixels of the value that layout
computed for the content's scrollable overflow based on the CSS styles of the
contents.
Now that scrollWidth and scrollHeight also depend on pixel snapping, their
values can deviate by up to one layer pixel from what the page might expect
based on the styles of the contents. This change requires a few changes to
existing tests.
The fact that scrollWidth and scrollHeight can change based on the position of
the scrollable element and the zoom level / resolution may surprise some web
pages. However, this also seems to happen in Edge. Edge seems to always round
scrollWidth and scrollHeight upwards, possibly to their equivalent of layout
device pixels.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 3LFV7Lio4tG
--HG--
extra : histedit_source : 5390eeebfe9a2791d9ac8e91ec1dfec4ec7b4118
There are a series of tests strewn about the tree that seem to exercise window
opening in one form or another, so I thought I'd put them under a tag.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 74JwLUTzaMU
--HG--
extra : rebase_source : 87439bacd9643ab63d015f58f44af2f8a74675a0
extra : source : 9d903a6a12aa7182252ec3e220c89b569c14e11b
There are a series of tests strewn about the tree that seem to exercise window
opening in one form or another, so I thought I'd put them under a tag.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 74JwLUTzaMU
--HG--
extra : rebase_source : 0c92084914ffe44a781f034b2416e17905656607
The web platform tests changes are just a cherrypick of
https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/2926 so I don't have to add
failure annotations until the next test uplift.
I've audited our uses of nsIFormControl, and this patch looks to me like it
preserves existing behavior in all but the following cases:
1) nsXBLPrototypeHandler::DispatchXBLCommand, the case of scrolling when space
is pressed while something inside a <label> is focused. We used to not scroll
in this situation; I think this is a bug, so I'm changing that behavior to
scroll instead.
2) In Accessible::RelationByType for the RelationType::DEFAULT_BUTTON case,
when mContent is a <label> we used to return its form's default submit element.
Now we will just return Relation().
This follows a spec change <https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/293>,
which AFAIK no other browser has implemented, so it has some regression
potential.
The web-platform tests changed are out-of-date and match the old spec,
so I'm changing them here to match the new spec.
This changes to match the spec, which also aligns the behavior of get
and set (get already maps out-of-range values to the default value).
There is currently no interoperable behavior here, but this aligns us
with IE -- tested in 11, hopefully true for Edge too.
On the way, I also fixed the fact that video's height and width were
being treated as signed.
Previously, every test and support file would be synced to the objdir
when running any test. Now that only those support files and tests requested
are synced, we note support files required beyond those in a test's
directory in ini manifests.
MozReview-Commit-ID: EmlDz9d4lqt
This will make sure that window.scrollbars correctly reflects the respective
chrome flags in e10s mode.
We also update nsXULWindow::SetContentScrollbarVisibility() to the new
nsContentUtils helper. That code is responsible for doing this work in the
single process case.
Inner width and height are more reliable than outer ones. Change to
outer ones may not trigger resize event on content process.
--HG--
extra : source : b89ae9bc6e0675896a2a464f17eee5e0b8575909
Yoshi Huang
Jessica Jong
Sebastian Hengst
Carsten "Tomcat" Book
Olli Pettay
Cameron McCormack
Wes Kocher
Florian Quèze
Blake Kaplan
John Dai
Ben Kelly
Edgar Chen
Mats Palmgren
Bob Owen
Christoph Kerschbaumer
Andrea Marchesini
Swapnesh Kumar Sahoo
Alex Gaynor
Alastor Wu
Phil Ringnalda
Dan Banner
Kan-Ru Chen
Aryeh Gregor
Valentin Gosu
Andreas Farre
Michael Layzell
Masatoshi Kimura
Benjamin Smedberg
Timothy Guan-tin Chien
Xidorn Quan
Geoff Brown
Tim Nguyen
Tooru Fujisawa
Tom Puttemans
Iris Hsiao
Ehsan Akhgari
Joel Maher
Neil Deakin
Thomas Wisniewski
Kate McKinley
Jan Beich
Ralph Giles
Stone Shih
Kevin Chan
Dragana Damjanovic
Decky Coss
Markus Stange
David Zbarsky
Alexandre Lissy
Paul Roberts
Thomas Nguyen
Jordan
Gordon Su
Mike Conley
Boris Zbarsky
Ben Tian
Xidorn Quan
Ryan VanderMeulen
William Chen
Chris Manchester
Jonathan Griffin
Andrew McCreight
Deepthi Venkitaramanan
Jonathan Kew