W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > September 2006

Re: possible bug in t100801-c42-ibx-ht-00-d-a.xht

From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 01:22:53 -0700
To: public-css-testsuite@w3.org
Message-ID: <20060925082253.GA28013@ridley.dbaron.org>
On Monday 2006-09-25 00:49 -0700, Peter Sorotokin wrote:
> It does define the height of the *line box*, but borders are supposed to
> be around the element's *content area* (if there are no padding), not
> the line box (so that, for example, when line-height property is
> modified, the position of the borders does not change relative to the
> text). It seems that this is how it is implemented in Mozilla and Opera
> (but not IE) and I think there are tests for that in the suite. The CSS
> spec could have been more explicit on how that works. 

Right.  Inline boxes have two different heights:  one that is used for
border and padding, and the other that is used for some types of
vertical alignment and to determine the height of the line box.

> The height of the content area is explicitly undefined in section 10.6.1
> (as you pointed out). What browsers seem to do is to define the content
> area height (and position) being the same as *default* line height
> (which is quite reasonable). Following the spec *suggestions* and
> defining content area height in terms of the em box of the font or
> ascender/descender (which is the same thing for Ahem) does not seem to
> work for this test.

For Ahem, these should both be exactly the same as the font-size.  Is
that not what the test is testing?

-David

-- 
L. David Baron                                <URL: http://dbaron.org/ >
           Technical Lead, Layout & CSS, Mozilla Corporation

Received on Monday, 25 September 2006 08:23:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 20 September 2010 17:51:54 GMT