options.html - Issue 29536764: Issue 5587, 5748 - Use mobile options page on Firefox for Android

Delta Between Two Patch Sets: options.html

Issue 29536764: Issue 5587, 5748 - Use mobile options page on Firefox for Android (Closed) Base URL: https://hg.adblockplus.org/adblockpluschrome/

Left Patch Set: Merge lib/browserAction.js into lib/options.js Created Sept. 30, 2017, 1:48 p.m.

Right Patch Set: Remove workaround for FOUC issue and update adblockplusui dependency Created Oct. 5, 2017, 1:24 p.m.

Left:
Right:

Use n/p to move between diff chunks; N/P to move between comments.

Jump to:

Left: Side by side diff | Download
Right: Side by side diff | Download

LEFT	RIGHT
1 <!DOCTYPE html>	1 <!DOCTYPE html>

2	2

3 <!--	3 <!--

4 - This file is part of Adblock Plus <https://adblockplus.org/>,	4 - This file is part of Adblock Plus <https://adblockplus.org/>,

5 - Copyright (C) 2006-present eyeo GmbH	5 - Copyright (C) 2006-present eyeo GmbH

6 -	6 -

7 - Adblock Plus is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify	7 - Adblock Plus is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify

8 - it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 3 as	8 - it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 3 as

9 - published by the Free Software Foundation.	9 - published by the Free Software Foundation.

10 -	10 -

(...skipping 14 matching lines...) Expand all Loading...
25 {	25 {

26 margin: 0;	26 margin: 0;

27 border: none;	27 border: none;

28 padding: 0;	28 padding: 0;

29 }	29 }

30	30

31 #content	31 #content

32 {	32 {

33 border: none;	33 border: none;

34 position: fixed;	34 position: fixed;

35 top: 0;

36 right: 0;

37 bottom: 0;

38 left: 0;

39 width: 100%;	35 width: 100%;
Sebastian Noack 2017/10/02 01:47:07 Isn't width+height redundant with top+bottom+left+ Isn't width+height redundant with top+bottom+left+right? Manish Jethani 2017/10/02 08:03:14 We discussed this earlier above. Strictly speaking Show quoted text On 2017/10/02 01:47:07, Sebastian Noack wrote: > Isn't width+height redundant with top+bottom+left+right? We discussed this earlier above. Strictly speaking it is redundant, but it doesn't hurt to leave it there. Sebastian Noack 2017/10/04 01:22:32 Well, the prior discussion seem to have been about Show quoted text On 2017/10/02 08:03:14, Manish Jethani wrote: > On 2017/10/02 01:47:07, Sebastian Noack wrote: > > Isn't width+height redundant with top+bottom+left+right? > > We discussed this earlier above. Strictly speaking it is redundant, but it > doesn't hurt to leave it there. Well, the prior discussion seem to have been about the redundant styles on the body element, not about the width/height for #content. Anyway, the use case you are optimizing for there seems to be rather theoretical. Extensions cannot inject styles or code on pages in other extensions, and UA/user stylesheets that would break fixed positioning would break websites all over the place. Anyway, what would setting width and height to 100% here do any good, if fixed positioning isn't in effect and this and all surrounding element's accumulated margin/padding/border isn't 0? Note that the 100% applies to the parent's content, but width/height apply to the area enclosed by this element's border. Manish Jethani 2017/10/04 03:46:48 I see, that discussion was about margin/padding. Show quoted text On 2017/10/04 01:22:32, Sebastian Noack wrote: > On 2017/10/02 08:03:14, Manish Jethani wrote: > > On 2017/10/02 01:47:07, Sebastian Noack wrote: > > > Isn't width+height redundant with top+bottom+left+right? > > > > We discussed this earlier above. Strictly speaking it is redundant, but it > > doesn't hurt to leave it there. > > Well, the prior discussion seem to have been about the redundant styles on the > body element, not about the width/height for #content. Anyway, the use case you > are optimizing for there seems to be rather theoretical. Extensions cannot > inject styles or code on pages in other extensions, and UA/user stylesheets that > would break fixed positioning would break websites all over the place. > [...] I see, that discussion was about margin/padding. OK, I've removed these. Manish Jethani 2017/10/04 03:57:15 Sorry, I was wrong. We do need width and height. I Show quoted text On 2017/10/04 03:46:48, Manish Jethani wrote: > On 2017/10/04 01:22:32, Sebastian Noack wrote: > > On 2017/10/02 08:03:14, Manish Jethani wrote: > > > On 2017/10/02 01:47:07, Sebastian Noack wrote: > > > > Isn't width+height redundant with top+bottom+left+right? > > > > > > We discussed this earlier above. Strictly speaking it is redundant, but it > > > doesn't hurt to leave it there. > > > > Well, the prior discussion seem to have been about the redundant styles on the > > body element, not about the width/height for #content. Anyway, the use case > you > > are optimizing for there seems to be rather theoretical. Extensions cannot > > inject styles or code on pages in other extensions, and UA/user stylesheets > that > > would break fixed positioning would break websites all over the place. > > [...] > > I see, that discussion was about margin/padding. > > OK, I've removed these. Sorry, I was wrong. We do need width and height. It is right and bottom that are redundant here. When both left and right are specified, that does not influence the width of the element, only one of them is used (depending on whether it's left-to-right or right-to-left). Likewise for top and bottom. Sebastian Noack 2017/10/04 05:33:14 Oh, I remember that differently, as well. Good to Show quoted text On 2017/10/04 03:57:15, Manish Jethani wrote: > On 2017/10/04 03:46:48, Manish Jethani wrote: > > On 2017/10/04 01:22:32, Sebastian Noack wrote: > > > On 2017/10/02 08:03:14, Manish Jethani wrote: > > > > On 2017/10/02 01:47:07, Sebastian Noack wrote: > > > > > Isn't width+height redundant with top+bottom+left+right? > > > > > > > > We discussed this earlier above. Strictly speaking it is redundant, but it > > > > doesn't hurt to leave it there. > > > > > > Well, the prior discussion seem to have been about the redundant styles on > the > > > body element, not about the width/height for #content. Anyway, the use case > > you > > > are optimizing for there seems to be rather theoretical. Extensions cannot > > > inject styles or code on pages in other extensions, and UA/user stylesheets > > that > > > would break fixed positioning would break websites all over the place. > > > [...] > > > > I see, that discussion was about margin/padding. > > > > OK, I've removed these. > > Sorry, I was wrong. We do need width and height. It is right and bottom that are > redundant here. > > When both left and right are specified, that does not influence the width of the > element, only one of them is used (depending on whether it's left-to-right or > right-to-left). Likewise for top and bottom. Oh, I remember that differently, as well. Good to know.
40 height: 100%;	36 height: 100%;

41 }	37 }

42 </style>	38 </style>

43 <script src="options.js" defer></script>	39 <script src="options.js" defer></script>

44 </head>	40 </head>

45 <body>	41 <body>

46 <iframe id="content" data-src="desktop-options.html" data-src-fennec="mobile -options.html"></iframe>	42 <iframe id="content" data-src="desktop-options.html" data-src-fennec="mobile -options.html"></iframe>

47 </body>	43 </body>

48 </html>	44 </html>

LEFT	RIGHT