Please, please fix chromium paint order bug

Copper Contributor

16_attachments_65eb6423-eee1-4ed4-9172-71c5c40283b8.png

 

Chromium has a longstanding paint order bug that prevents text from rendering properly when it is both underlined and has a drop-shadow applied.  The underline ends up being broken up by the drop-shadow.  This is only one ramification of the bug; the bug results in many other text-rendering oddities.  As another example, multiple text shadows spanning multiple lines also render wrong (see below image).  Firefox, old IE, old Edge, and other browsers do not have this bug and render text correctly.  New Edge now has the bug from chromium.  Can you please please, please fix this chromium paint order bug, now that it affects Edge, too?  https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=776627 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=713376

 

Screenshot from 2018-03-08 11-35-46.png

13 Replies
That text distortion looks really awful. im interested to test it out too, can you please suggest me a web page that can display the bug as obviously as possible? thanks

@HotCakeX Did you check out those links?  There are also several others on the chromium forums.  Users regularly resubmit different variants of this paint order bug, but chromium admins have more or less suppressed all of the bug reports by merging them, making them ownerless, and giving them lower than the highest priority, so that they never get addressed.

 

@David Rubino Any chance of this bug being addressed by the Edge Dev team?

Well sites like
https://www.w3.org
or
https://jsfiddle.net
don't count.

I was referring to real life examples on website with at least decent daily users. that means no self hosted site to produce a possible bug that Can also be caused by wrongly implementing CSS codes.

@HotCakeX I mean, I think j-archive.com gets "decent daily users".

 

As posted in one of the bugs.chromium.org links in the post that started this thread (which were the links I was referring to), here is some very basic HTML that reproduces the bug:

 

https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/attachmentText?aid=308575

I'm not sure about that.
And. the design of the website is obviously old.
anyway it's not up to me, maybe a developer of the Edge wants to change that behavior.

but i wouldn't call it a bug, specially when it only happens on very specific old websites and needs special situations to produce it.

i wish more people confirmed it in their daily internet usage and website browsing, would definitely help developers better.

@HotCakeX Respectfully, to say that it is not a bug, or that it only manifests on "old websites," is neither helpful nor honest.  It is obviously a bug, as marked so and as recognized by the chromium developers.  No one disputes that it is a bug; the only controversy is what priority should be given to fixing it, and whom should have the honors.  As well, the bug affects any website that attempts to both underline and drop-shadow text.  This is true whether the website is "old" or "new."  And, it's worth noting that the text-shadow property wasn't introduced until CSS3, so any website that has this particular paint-order problem (of shadows being printed above underlines) can't be that old.  (The first Chrome to support text-shadow was 4.0, and the first IE was 10.0 [released 2012].  If you're sixteen years old, I can see how 2012 seems like eons ago, but to me, it was yesterday.)

@RobertKS 

Please stay on topic and polite:
" If you're sixteen years old, I can see how 2012 seems like eons ago, but to me, it was yesterday."

 

Read my last post again, i said: "i wish more people confirmed it in their daily internet usage and website browsing, would definitely help developers better."

 

I also asked for more examples and preferably on new websites but instead of providing that, you accuse others of lying. that's neither helpful nor polite.

@HotCakeX Anyone who wants a "new website" example need merely draft a simple HTML page that includes underlined shadowed text and upload it to a server so that it is accessible on the internet.  The "newness" of the website is simply not a variable in the producibility of this paint order bug.  I am a bit incredulous over your perception and attitude.  You cast doubt on the validity of the bug.  That is not "lying," but it is gaslighting, when someone describes a true experience and someone else tries to convince the other person that said experience is not real.  I respectfully decline to be gaslit. :)

Here is some test code.  You can run it at one of the many HTML test sites like codetester.org or htmledit.squarefree.com

 

<!doctype html>
<style>
.underline {
background-color: blue;
color: #ffffff;
font-size: 200%;
text-decoration: underline;
text-shadow: 5px 5px 0px #000000;
font-style: normal;
font-weight: bold;
}
</style>
<body bgcolor="blue">
<em class="underline">DOES THE SHADOW OF THIS TEXT APPEAR OVER OR UNDER ITS UNDERLINE? THE APPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR IS UNDER. THE BUG BEHAVIOR IS OVER.</em>
</body>

@RobertKS 


@RobertKS wrote:

@HotCakeX Anyone who wants a "new website" example need merely draft a simple HTML page that includes underlined shadowed text and upload it to a server so that it is accessible on the internet.  The "newness" of the website is simply not a variable in the producibility of this paint order bug.  I am a bit incredulous over your perception and attitude.  You cast doubt on the validity of the bug.  That is not "lying," but it is gaslighting, when someone describes a true experience and someone else tries to convince the other person that said experience is not real.  I respectfully decline to be gaslit. :)


 

I only asked you to provide examples of where that bug happens and preferably on websites that are not for testing, but websites that are in production and are being used by people. but until now you haven't provided any examples. 

 

I have no idea what you're talking about so I'm going to respectfully ignore the off topic parts, you can hold on to your thoughts though, it's your choice.

 

 

@RobertKS 

 

Spoiler

@RobertKS wrote:

Here is some test code.  You can run it at one of the many HTML test sites like codetester.org or htmledit.squarefree.com

 

<!doctype html>
<style>
.underline {
background-color: blue;
color: #ffffff;
font-size: 200%;
text-decoration: underline;
text-shadow: 5px 5px 0px #000000;
font-style: normal;
font-weight: bold;
}
</style>
<body bgcolor="blue">
<em class="underline">DOES THE SHADOW OF THIS TEXT APPEAR OVER OR UNDER ITS UNDERLINE? THE APPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR IS UNDER. THE BUG BEHAVIOR IS OVER.</em>
</body>

Not All Bugs Are Worth Fixing

 

Don't get me wrong. developers would want to be the first person to know about any bug that results in inconvenience for a user. But how do you distinguish between bugs that users are likely to encounter, and bugs that users will probably never see?

 

that's my whole point here.

 

The term "triage" was borrowed from medical triage where a doctor or nurse has to prioritize care for a large group of injured people. The main job of a software bug triage team is to decide which bugs need to be fixed (or conversely, which bugs we're willing to ship with).

 

Triage isn't exactly my idea of a good time. But you have to do it, because you'll always have far more bugs than you have development time. Nobody has the luxury of fixing all the bugs in their software.

 

 

Testers produce two kinds of bugs:

 

  1. A small subset of very serious bugs that everyone can immediately agree on. These are great. They're the kind of catches that make me thank my lucky stars that we have dedicated testers. You go, girl-slash-boy!
  2. Everything else. A vast, gray wasteland of pseudo-bugs that nobody can really agree on. Is it an inconvenience for the user? Would users really do things this way? Would a user ever run into this? Do we even care?

 

 

 

@HotCakeX Why are you still in this thread?  If you can't fix this real, documented bug, what are you contributing to this conversation?  No one disputes that bugs should be triaged according to their severity.  The question is whether a minor bug should be left unaddressed for so long, and whether Microsoft now has the power to meaningfully address it now that they are invested in chromium.

@RobertKS 


@RobertKS wrote:

@HotCakeX Why are you still in this thread?  If you can't fix this real, documented bug, what are you contributing to this conversation?  No one disputes that bugs should be triaged according to their severity.  The question is whether a minor bug should be left unaddressed for so long, and whether Microsoft now has the power to meaningfully address it now that they are invested in chromium.


 

It's an open forum so anyone can comment anywhere they want.

 

for the same reasons I provided in my previous comments and also for the fact that no one else has complained about this bug (due to its rarity), i think it's not worth it.

 

also you still haven't provided any examples that where this so called bug is causing you a problem.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about how to produce this bug using custom HTML codes to intentionally produce it.