W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2001

RE: May have to do with "column layout" WAS:RE: Proposal of alternative to CSS3 box-sizing property

From: Manos Batsis <m.batsis@bsnet.gr>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 13:09:54 +0300
Message-ID: <A35E2040C17F0C48B941B8F4D0DF122908E2AA@ermhs.Athens.BrokerSystems.gr>
To: "Rod Dav4is" <dav4is@bigfoot.com>
Cc: <www-style@w3.org>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rod Dav4is [mailto:dav4is@bigfoot.com]

> Manos Batsis wrote in part:
> > But I don't want the default or "auto", that's why I'm 
> writing the style
> > in the first place!
> Note that only so-called "legacy" UAs -- those which have not yet
> implemented the new spec -- would behave in this way. In my 
> view it would be
> better for them to ignore "width:50% outside" (and default to 
> "width:auto")
> than to misapply "width:50%;box-sizing:border-box" by setting the
> content-width to 50%.

Damn, had not seen this one coming. How about using this: 

 box-sizing:border-box; /* (or width-include:border;) */

With max-width being the safety belt against browsers that do not
understand the new ways of calculating the width.

Kindest regards,

Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2001 06:11:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:58 UTC