Closed
Bug 50974
Opened 24 years ago
Closed 23 years ago
png transparency isn't when a background in a table cell.
Categories
(Core :: Graphics: ImageLib, defect, P3)
Tracking
()
Future
People
(Reporter: pnunn, Assigned: pavlov)
References
()
Details
(Keywords: regression, Whiteboard: [imglib])
Attachments
(4 files)
png transparency isn't when a background in a table cell.
Works ok when alphachannel used for transparency mask.
Is broken when binary transparency used in cell background
or tablebackground.
-pn
Comment 2•24 years ago
|
||
Adding `skins' based on Nikhil's comments in n.p.m.ui.
This looks like a dup of bug 46871, actually.
Keywords: skins
*** Bug 52088 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Attached is a cleaned up version of the testcase with an additional test added.
I assume the problem you were pointing out was the lack of the image in the
bottom left corner of the third table "badchrome not specified as background".
As you can see from the fifth table, this problem also occurs with GIFs.
Comment 10•24 years ago
|
||
Comment 11•24 years ago
|
||
*** Bug 57268 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 12•24 years ago
|
||
*** Bug 57268 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Reporter | ||
Comment 13•24 years ago
|
||
All pnunn bugs reassigned to Pav, who is taking over
the imglib.
Assignee: pnunn → pavlov
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
Updated•24 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [imglib]
Comment 14•24 years ago
|
||
using win32 installer mtrunk build 2001040904, but seen since 2001040404.
this bug is back, as a regression - png images in the thinice chrome are no
longer trasnparent. either this bug or bug 19283 should be reopened.
Comment 15•24 years ago
|
||
*** Bug 75530 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 17•24 years ago
|
||
Patch to fix the problem the same way I did for Bug 19283, clear the color
values corresponding to transparent pixels.
I think this is the correct fix. I cannot verify because at the moment I don't
have a working build environment. This may impact other platforms, in which
case the #ifdef XP_PC should be removed/changed. If somebody with a build
environment could try this very short patch to make sure I am clearing the color
from the transparent pixels and not the opaque ones, that would be very helpful.
If this patch doesn't fix the problem please see Bug 19283 for history.
Comment 18•24 years ago
|
||
Comment 19•24 years ago
|
||
mkaply: can you have someone who worries about os/2 imaging check out this
patch?
chris: if you are trying to target Windows, then please use XP_WIN instead of
XP_PC; however let's see what mkaply has to say..
Comment 20•24 years ago
|
||
Could someone better explain the problem here. I have loaded the test
case, but i don't quite know what I am looking for.
Comment 21•24 years ago
|
||
I've posted a better example of the problem at:
http://members.home.com/chill244/binpng.html
I think my patch might have cleared the color from the opaque pixels rather than
the transparent ones. Sorry I don't have a build environment, or I would
confirm it myself.
if (*line++) {
aptr[x>>3] |= 1<<(7-x&0x7);
}
+#ifdef XP_PC
+ else
+ cptr[-1] = cptr[-2] = cptr[-3] = 0;
+#endif
After looking at the OS/2 image code, I believe OS/2 operates the same way
Windows does. This may be something that should be done on all platforms. It
should be tested.
Comment 22•24 years ago
|
||
*** Bug 74542 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 23•24 years ago
|
||
Yes, the latest patch (4-19) correctly works for the given test case on OS/2 build.
Comment 24•24 years ago
|
||
*** Bug 77262 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 25•24 years ago
|
||
*** Bug 81130 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 26•24 years ago
|
||
is bug 82373 a dup of this?
jake
Comment 27•24 years ago
|
||
*** Bug 82525 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 28•24 years ago
|
||
*** Bug 83087 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 29•24 years ago
|
||
Comment 30•24 years ago
|
||
Bug 81130 (a dup of this one) is also about GIFs.
Comment 31•24 years ago
|
||
PNG transparency isn't working (2001-05-25 build), even when the image is *not*
in a table cell. See <URL: http://home.no.net/huftis/nynorsk-
programvare/mozilla/ > for an example (the two W3C images at the bottom of the
page). You'll probably have to make the viewport a bit narrow to see it.
(I'm mentioning it in this bug, since other relevant bugs concerning this (but
not PNGs in tables) have been marked as duplicates of this.)
Comment 32•24 years ago
|
||
What are we waiting for with this bug?
Comment 33•24 years ago
|
||
Am testing Mozilla under SunOS2.6 with all the debug on. My homepage
www.pathtech.org has a transparent GIF as background to a table. During load of
my homepage I get the following message:
WARNING: Frame setting default background color but it has transparent
background!, file nsFrame.cpp, line 4048
The image is never rendered.
Comment 34•24 years ago
|
||
I believe this should be fixed for Mozilla 1.0, particularly seeing as it's a
regression. Could someone with appropriate permissions please add the
appropriate keyword. Thanks.
Comment 35•24 years ago
|
||
Could someone with the appropriate permissions also correct the summary, as this
occurs on (as near as I can tell) any PNG image, regardless of how it is loaded?
I've seen it with <img src="whatever.png"> both inside and outside of tables,
as well as image bullets for lists defined through stylesheets.
Comment 36•24 years ago
|
||
is this bug related to bug 84980 ?
It seems that PNG binary transparency may not really work well at all.
Comment 37•24 years ago
|
||
I have put up a simple page to show this bug (i think it´s the same).
http://www.mecronome.de/mozbugs/pngbug/
The picture should be transparent, but it isn´t. I have Mozilla for Windows
Bulid ID 2001062815
Updated•24 years ago
|
Keywords: mozilla0.9.4
Comment 38•23 years ago
|
||
It appears to me that this bug has been resolved with yesterday's fix to bug
84980. So they were the same bug after all!
Comment 39•23 years ago
|
||
Whoohoo marking dupe.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 84980 ***
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 23 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•