diff --git a/tests/gui/interact/ui-location-solver-test.cpp b/tests/gui/interact/ui-location-solver-test.cpp
index dc9ba7d75..67e055eab 100644
--- a/tests/gui/interact/ui-location-solver-test.cpp
+++ b/tests/gui/interact/ui-location-solver-test.cpp
@@ -116,8 +116,8 @@ namespace test {
CHECK (isnil (solver.solve (rule, UIC_VIEW, "worldview")));
// add second location clause to the rule
- // (meaning: accept any suitable location within the first window)
- rule.append(UICoord::firstWindow());
+ // (meaning: accept any path leading down to an "exclusivePanel")
+ rule.append(UICoord().panel("exclusivePanel"));
// and now we get a solution, since the second rule can be wildcard-matched
UICoord location = solver.solve (rule, UIC_VIEW, "worldview");
@@ -130,8 +130,9 @@ namespace test {
// To verify this, we attach a coordinate resolver (likewise backed by our dummy UI)
UICoordResolver resolver{location, locationQuery};
CHECK (resolver.isCoveredPartially());
- CHECK (UIC_PANEL == resolver.coverDepth());
- }
+ CHECK (not resolver.isCoveredTotally());
+ CHECK (UIC_VIEW == resolver.coverDepth()); // covered up to VIEW level
+ } // (the view itself is not covered)
diff --git a/wiki/thinkPad.ichthyo.mm b/wiki/thinkPad.ichthyo.mm
index aba2cf81c..419ab01a9 100644
--- a/wiki/thinkPad.ichthyo.mm
+++ b/wiki/thinkPad.ichthyo.mm
@@ -8402,7 +8402,7 @@
-
+ kann jedoch demonstrieren,
+
+ daß der Algorithmus solche Lösungen verwirft
+