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

Issue 780820 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: Duplicate
Merged: issue 762735
Owner:
Last visit > 30 days ago
Closed: Nov 2017
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: Linux , Windows , Mac
Pri: 1
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

Inline-block elements disappear after text-overflow: ellipsis hid it

Reported by t...@ventureiq.nl, Nov 2 2017

Issue description

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_13_0) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/62.0.3202.75 Safari/537.36

Steps to reproduce the problem:
1. Open this fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/dew52L8u/7/
2. Resize a column of the table, so that the icons are replaced by ellipsis
3. inline-block elements (the fa-icons) are disappearing when making columns wider again.

What is the expected behavior?
The icons that are hidden by the ellipsis should appear when there is enough space again.

What went wrong?
The following css will fix it again:
td .fa {
    display: inline !important;
}

Did this work before? No 

Does this work in other browsers? Yes

Chrome version: 62.0.3202.75  Channel: stable
OS Version: OS X 10.13.0
Flash Version:
 
Labels: Needs-Triage-M62
Cc: sc00335...@techmahindra.com
Components: Blink>HTML
Labels: -Type-Bug -Pri-2 hasbisect-per-revision ReleaseBlock-Stable Triaged-ET M-62 OS-Linux OS-Windows Pri-1 Type-Bug-Regression
Owner: robho...@gmail.com
Status: Assigned (was: Unconfirmed)
Able to reproduce this issue on 62.0.3202.75 using Ubuntu 14.04,Mac 10.12.6 and Windows 10. But got fixed on latest canary 64.0.3257.0. Hence providing Reverse bisect Info.

Reverse Bisect Info:
================
Last Bad Build: 63.0.3208.0
First Good Build: 63.0.3213.3

You are probably looking for a change made after 500538 (known good), but no later than 500539 (first known bad).
CHANGELOG URL:
 https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+log/14527543958d60b00d130bb0a06945d72b44966f..27c507212fd72de9f944ff001665c242a7785cce

Probably fixed by : https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/655309

@robhogan:Could you please confirm if its safe to merge to M-62 in case we have stable refresh?

Comment 3 by robho...@gmail.com, Nov 3 2017

Mergedinto: 762735
Status: Duplicate (was: Assigned)
In https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=762735 we decided not to merge to M62.

Sign in to add a comment