W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2012

[whatwg] seamless iframes

From: Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 18:59:09 -0700
Message-ID: <CANMdWTsdExwo=rG2e6oMdfbz1p=YMAP8Q+tQzhvDQJsnT7zC6Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 6:52 PM, Ojan Vafai <ojan at chromium.org> wrote:

> 1.  We should add iframe[seamless] { display:block; }.
> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#embedded-content-2 already
> expects iframe:not([seamless]) { border: 2px inset; }. In 90% percent of
> uses, seamless iframes will not want a border and will want to fill their
> container. This way, seamless iframes behave roughly like sandboxable divs,
> which is what web developers want.
>
> 2. http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#attr-iframe-seamless "In
> visual media, in a CSS-supporting user agent: the user agent should set the
> intrinsic width of the iframe to the width that the element would have if
> it was a non-replaced block-level element with 'width: auto'."
>
> This doesn't get the behavior you'd want with cases that need
> shrink-wrapped behavior. Some cases that need handling:
> <iframe seamless style="display:inline">
> <iframe seamless style="display:inline-block">
> <iframe seamless style="float:left">
> <iframe seamless style="position:absolute">
>

3. The default margin on the body element inside a seamless iframe should
be 0. Again, this is what 90%+ of uses will expect. We shouldn't require
everyone using seamless iframes to have to set the body's margin to 0.
Received on Wednesday, 4 April 2012 18:59:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 January 2013 18:48:07 GMT