I don't know if it's "DOM: HTML", but either HTML or CSS is not rendered correctly on the following page: http://tgos.org/firebird/barracks.html Check this page twice, once with Firebird 0.7 (or Internet Explorer 6.0) and once with a more recent nightly. See the difference? If not, move over some of the links on the left or re-size the window. What happens? Blocks (which are tables) are disappearing without any reason or don't appear at all in the first place. What should happen? It should behave like IE or Firebird 0.7 Blocks (= tables) should stay where they are.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.7a) Gecko/20040112 one of the errors shown by validator: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://tgos.org/firebird/barracks.html#line-299 # Line 127, column 20: character "%" is not allowed in the value of attribute "ID" <div id="abi%_NR_%" style="position: relative; top: 0px; left: 1%;"> one of the 3 divs shown after reload only: <div id="abi%_NR_%" style="position: relative; top: 0px; left: 1%;"> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="Mainborder" style="width: 96%;"> <tbody><tr><td class="MainHead"><a name="Langbögen">Langbögen</a></td></tr> <tr><td class="main"><a href="javascript:showElement('abi',2)">Jagdbogen</a><br> <br><a href="#anfang">nach oben</a></td></tr> </tbody></table> </div> All three divs have the same id="abi%_NR_%" They are shown after reload, but vanish if touched with the mouse. link to the css: http://tgos.org/firebird/barracks_files/new_wds.css links for checking html and/or CSS: http://validator.w3.org/ http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/

This broke between 2003-09-13-05 and 2003-09-14-05 The most likely cause is the checkin for bug 173277 A minimal testcase is needed here; please don't file bugs as NEW without one.

This is a more simple testcase. CSS removed, images removed, uncessary TABLE and DIV tags removed. If I remove even more, the problem won't show up any longer.

The td really does need to be rel pos (removing that part makes the bug disappear), and the div needs to be moved over "far enough" to the right (11px seems to do the trick). The width:100% also seems to be required. I see a lot of empty damage rect spew, so are we just invalidating the wrong area?

taking

Comment on attachment 143817 [details] [diff] [review] patch + nsRect VerticallyAlignChild(nsIPresContext* aPresContext, Add a comment explaining what is returned. + nsSize(cellSize.width, fullyComplete ? aAvailableHeight : desiredSize.height)); Should be indented. Simple stuff, looks great

Comment on attachment 143863 [details] [diff] [review] more compact patch Robert could you please rereview, its smaller and addresses IMHO your concerns

Comment on attachment 143863 [details] [diff] [review] more compact patch sure

Comment on attachment 143863 [details] [diff] [review] more compact patch its a low risk patch, which is IMHO the right thing to do.

Comment on attachment 143863 [details] [diff] [review] more compact patch a=chofmann for 1.7

fix checked in