From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#59549: EWW ordered list display irregularity Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2024 14:37:39 +0200 Message-ID: <86msicsfl8.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86a5edtxms.fsf@gnu.org> <87a5ed2gky.fsf@sebasmonia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="36176"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: jporterbugs@gmail.com, 59549@debbugs.gnu.org, nicholasdrozd@gmail.com To: =?UTF-8?Q?Sebasti=C3=A1n_?= =?UTF-8?Q?Mon=C3=ADa?= Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 06 13:40:57 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1t8fLE-0009CX-BR for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 13:40:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t8fJh-0003kt-3B; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 07:39:21 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t8fIQ-0003MN-LD for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 07:38:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t8fIQ-0008JS-9k for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 07:38:02 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debbugs.gnu.org; s=debbugs-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:To:Subject; bh=3XQcKo81+72d1u7yZrhxFbzSfGW9u3jx5JtaJwSQ8VI=; b=uVQEOnznD2zHhpj5ke9MRehLW/EVAssJA7aBPX3AMONOxFeulkzpXZ2DvjIm5eJy2i0P/Up99H6+dMSm20ioIWFHWNhLI01FpiTiWslkNHBATyHabbazkB/DMPApt/z/APEvDMc4G0Uflg6vV21q3F/Ga8QtLQ7spR04BCtM+LeR23hhEhftbeeYep6lR214zLdSh16Rk8jdayzsLJnF5BHaop0r8zkbY/cvJaiK0OLbukYq22k5QaWqQtwgAqVclTeXqZhrus373Z/URAnWdp9CBzDtPACRrfRVL9yxjvWyAkSzySrGemJryvfDqnZZrpqKwyDwtipgQHh2Qx6dOw==; Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t8fIQ-0005Ku-4J for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 07:38:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2024 12:38:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 59549 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 59549-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B59549.173089667220418 (code B ref 59549); Wed, 06 Nov 2024 12:38:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 59549) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Nov 2024 12:37:52 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39952 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t8fIF-0005JF-MH for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 07:37:51 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:58960) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t8fID-0005Im-Me for 59549@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 07:37:50 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t8fI8-0008Bc-A0; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 07:37:44 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: Date; bh=3XQcKo81+72d1u7yZrhxFbzSfGW9u3jx5JtaJwSQ8VI=; b=ZfFMFx4nOau7HMLWe11y xzNZy37MQjSWCWsZ/nRZQCP+q3U64OiH2/HnuPvhzk8JhBHqjagKaesxK1RNlyepUgJbTAPWIXvcq NtFefn2d9DB2fjkEUwBMcVNgivTdMFZRlt81S1bXOEfzssiPapKwUUJz6KBO7qjSyb2T4/UfO3TMo A2zqidHnnq8dBjqCVtPwSDiHpO2rewMZ2XkWPvXArDHwXGCaJ69DxhXxKd0zXsv94kLPCyT3du/r1 nWq7gQiEVzBD5H9u2TxG5A8Fk1yoSmfqUlc6ojKj149Q3YYXqH6+GWqG/sZuYbsDQPMMhDq/I/RH3 blacY1rFBPpR/g==; In-Reply-To: <87a5ed2gky.fsf@sebasmonia.com> (message from =?UTF-8?Q?Sebasti=C3=A1n_?= =?UTF-8?Q?Mon=C3=ADa?= on Tue, 05 Nov 2024 22:20:45 -0500) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:294951 Archived-At: > From: Sebastián Monía > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , 59549@debbugs.gnu.org, > nicholasdrozd@gmail.com > Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2024 22:20:45 -0500 > > Jim Porter writes: > > > On 11/5/2024 9:10 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >>> From: Sebastián Monía > >>> Cc: 59549@debbugs.gnu.org > >>> Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2024 09:38:28 -0500 > >>> > >>> If we think it is OK to render the empty items, then we could close this > >>> bug instead of merging. Either way, one less item in the TODO list ;) > >> Thanks. > >> I'm not enough of an HTML expert to be sure that this is the right > >> fix > >> in general, sorry. I hope someone else will be able to tell. > > > > I think the current behavior with the empty list item is correct, > > actually. Other browsers don't show the list item (and renumber the > > list as appropriate) because the CSS rule for ".mw-empty-elt" has > > "display: none". EWW/SHR don't parse CSS[1], and so we show the empty > > item. > > > > You can see the same "problem" in Firefox if you load > > and go to View -> Page > > Style -> No Style. Since that's roughly what EWW/SHR is doing, I think > > we're consistent with other browsers here. > > > > [1] Well, they can parse some limited inline CSS using the "style" > > attribute, but that doesn't apply here since the styling comes from a > > CSS class. > > Then we can close this report? Since it isn't really a bug, but "working > as intended". Yes, I think so.