New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like or ) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.

Issue 606208 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: Available
Owner: ----
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: All
Pri: 2
Type: Bug


Show other hotlists

Hotlists containing this issue:
layoutng


Sign in to add a comment

[flexbox] wrong painting order for abs.pos. boxes inside flex items that has been reordered with 'order'

Project Member Reported by mpalmg...@mozilla.com, Apr 24 2016

Issue description

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/45.0

Example URL:

Steps to reproduce the problem:
1. load the attached file
2. 
3. 

What is the expected behavior?
two green boxes that says SUCCESS

What went wrong?
the box at the top is red and says FAIL

Does it occur on multiple sites: N/A

Is it a problem with a plugin? No 

Did this work before? N/A 

Does this work in other browsers? Yes 

Chrome version: 51.0.2700.0 (Official Build) dev (64-bit)  Channel: n/a
OS Version: 
Flash Version: 

The Flexbox spec is utterly clear about the expected
painting order:
https://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox-1/#propdef-order
"This also affects the painting order [CSS21], exactly as if the flex items were reordered in the source document."

That is,

  <flexbox>
    <item1 style="order:2">
      ...
    </item1>
    <item2 style="order:1">
      ...
    </item2>
  </flexbox>

should render exactly as,

  <flexbox>
    <item2>
      ...
    </item2>
    <item1>
      ...
    </item1>
  </flexbox>

regardless of what content those items contains.
(I believe this bug also affects your Grid implementation.)

Fwiw, the attached test renders correctly in Firefox.
 
flexbox-order.html
724 bytes View Download
Cc: ashej...@chromium.org
Components: Blink>Layout>Flexbox
Labels: -OS-Linux -Type-Compat M-52 OS-All Type-Bug
Status: Untriaged (was: Unconfirmed)
The above issue is reproducible on All-OS (Windows (10 & 7), Mac 10.11.4 & Ubuntu 14.04) with chrome versions : 50.2661.87(Stable), 51.0.2704.22(Beta) & 52.0.2714.0(Canary).
This is a non regression issue as can be seen from M30 build - 30.0.1549.0. Hence marking the same as Untriaged.

Thank you!
Cc: chrishtr@chromium.org
Components: Blink>Paint
I believe this is a dup of bug 370604 -- Chris, can you confirm?
Status: Available (was: Untriaged)
I don't think it is a duplicate of bug 370604 in the sense of compositing.
However, my guess is that it does involve PaintLayer. In this case there needs
to be some logic for re-ordering PaintLayers with the 'order' style.
Status: WontFix (was: Available)
Sorry, I misinterpreted the bug. This is actually wontfix:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016Apr/0351.htmlhttps://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox/issues-cr-20160301#issue-12
Please reopen the bug, because you have misunderstood the problem.

I'm very well aware of the recent CSSWG decision that the 'order' property
doesn't apply to abs.pos. elements.  This is NOT what this bug is about.

If you look at the testcase carefully, you will see that the abs.pos. elements
there does NOT even have 'order' specified on them.  The (in-flow) flex items
do though and it applies on those.  Again the spec is very very clear about
the effect it should have on flex items:
https://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox-1/#propdef-order
"This also affects the painting order [CSS21], exactly as if the flex items were reordered in the source document."

If you reorder the flex items manually, as I did in the testcase in
the flexbox at the bottom, that's how it should render.
IOW, 'order' on flex items should in fact affect the painting order of
descendant abs.pos. boxes just as it normally does on any other of its
child boxes.  (The CSSWG decision has nothing to do with this, it's
only about ignoring 'order' on the abs.pos. boxes themselves.)

The testcase works correctly in Firefox.

Comment 6 by dholb...@gmail.com, Apr 26 2016

Cc: dholb...@gmail.com
Status: Untriaged (was: WontFix)

Comment 8 by e...@chromium.org, Apr 27 2016

Status: Available (was: Untriaged)
Project Member

Comment 9 by sheriffbot@chromium.org, Jun 1 2016

Labels: -M-52 M-53 MovedFrom-52
Moving this nonessential bug to the next milestone.

For more details visit https://www.chromium.org/issue-tracking/autotriage - Your friendly Sheriffbot
Project Member

Comment 10 by sheriffbot@chromium.org, Jul 12 2016

Labels: -M-53 MovedFrom-53
This issue has been moved once and is lower than Pri-1. Removing the milestone.

For more details visit https://www.chromium.org/issue-tracking/autotriage - Your friendly Sheriffbot
Labels: Hotlist-Interop
Bulk-adding Hotlist-Interop to bugs filed by other browser vendors based on the summary.  Feel free to remove if this issue doesn't actually reflect a difference in behavior between engines.
Project Member

Comment 12 by sheriffbot@chromium.org, Oct 4 2017

Labels: Hotlist-Recharge-Cold
Status: Untriaged (was: Available)
This issue has been Available for over a year. If it's no longer important or seems unlikely to be fixed, please consider closing it out. If it is important, please re-triage the issue.

Sorry for the inconvenience if the bug really should have been left as Available. If you change it back, also remove the "Hotlist-Recharge-Cold" label.

For more details visit https://www.chromium.org/issue-tracking/autotriage - Your friendly Sheriffbot
Labels: -Hotlist-Recharge-Cold BugSource-User PaintTeamTriaged-20171004
Status: Available (was: Untriaged)
Cc: -ashej...@chromium.org
Project Member

Comment 15 by sheriffbot@chromium.org, Nov 2

Labels: Hotlist-Recharge-Cold
Status: Untriaged (was: Available)
This issue has been Available for over a year. If it's no longer important or seems unlikely to be fixed, please consider closing it out. If it is important, please re-triage the issue.

Sorry for the inconvenience if the bug really should have been left as Available.

For more details visit https://www.chromium.org/issue-tracking/autotriage - Your friendly Sheriffbot
Status: Available (was: Untriaged)

Sign in to add a comment