| TTO | |
| May 31 2022, 4:03 AM |
| F35248815: image.png | |
| Jun 17 2022, 9:39 AM |
| F35191977: image.png | |
| May 31 2022, 4:03 AM |
| F35191968: image.png | |
| May 31 2022, 4:03 AM |
All HTML views in AutoWikiBrowser have lost most or all of the base CSS stylesheets.
The diff view is affected - lines that are blank on both the "old" and "new" sides do not appear. This is supposed to have five lines, where the second and fourth lines are blank:
The preview is affected - base HTML styling is used for most elements.
The history view is badly affected to the point of being unusable:
The styling is a result of the fact that AWB's renderer is based on some old version of IE I think, as AWB also fails to render styles from TemplateStyles correctly in Preview.
This is supposed to have five lines, where the second and fourth lines are blank:
I see this as expected behavior. Do you have proof that these used to be rendered?
Surely expected behaviour would be what the web UI does in this case, namely, to actually render a blank line:
Otherwise it's impossible to tell where the blank lines are. You want to be 100% sure of what you are doing with AWB lest you are accused of being careless, and this doesn't help.
To prove my point further, the task description should have said "first and fourth lines"...
Surely expected behaviour would be what the web UI does in this case, namely, to actually render a blank line:
Otherwise it's impossible to tell where the blank lines are. You want to be 100% sure of what you are doing with AWB lest you are accused of being careless, and this doesn't help.
To prove my point further, the task description should have said "first and fourth lines"...
"It should be the same" is not a bug. Do you have proof to indicate this behavior has changed from some earlier date?
I had assumed, by the fact that the Internet Explorer default font was being used for the diff display, that it was a styling regression. But looking through old screenshots of AWB in Google Images, it's quite possible it has always been this way. In that case, I will file it separately as an enhancement request.