- From: Ian Turner <vectro@stop.mail-abuse.org>
- Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2001 16:01:36 -0800 (PST)
- To: David Eisenberg <david@catcode.com>
- cc: www-style@w3.org, Bert Bos <Bert.Bos@sophia.inria.fr>
Perhaps it would be best to provide a way to specify the box size, rather
than the content size.
I can think of other cases where it would be preferable to specify the box
size, as well.
Ian
On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, David Eisenberg wrote:
> Background
> ==========
> Many web designers make websites using dimensions in percentages to keep
> the ratios of areas on the screen in pleasing proportion as the user agent
> window shrinks or grows. This liquid design becomes difficult with
> standards-compliant CSS, since a width specification describes only the
> content box, and not the padding, borders, or margins. Thus, these
> classes
>
> .index-class { width: 25%; margin: 5px; padding: 6px; }
> .content-class { width: 75%, margin: 3px; padding: 4px; }
>
> will not give you a nice liquid layout; the total width is
> 100% plus 36 pixels (margin plus padding times two).
>
> For a detailed example, see page four of the article at
> http://www.alistapart.com/stories/journey/, where
> the author says,
>
> "I couldn't exactly write this in my Style Sheet:
> {width: 75% AND PLEASE IGNORE THE PADDING}"
>
> Although CSS-3's box-sizing property
> (see http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-userint#box-sizing)
> addresses much of the problem, the following proposal may be
> independently useful:
>
> Proposal
> ==========
> Expand the syntax of CSS to include DIMENSION-EXPRESSION, defined as
>
> (DIMENSION | PERCENTAGE) ( + | - ) ( DIMENSION | PERCENTAGE)
>
> Thus allowing you to solve the liquid layout problem by specifying
>
> .index-class {width: 25%-22px; margin: 5px; padding: 6px; }
> .content-class {width: 75%-14px; margin: 3px; padding: 4px; }
>
> Comments/Consequences
> =====================
> 1) Parsing a length would become more difficult; since I am not a
> computer science kind of guy, I am not sure if they could be
> parsed unambiguously.
>
> 2) I am not proposing a full expression language with parentheses
> and multiplication/division/modulo operators; just addition and
> subtraction. I believe this is sufficient to meet the needs of people
> who want liquid layouts.
>
> 3) The proposal allows mixing of units with a straightforward and
> clear syntax.
>
> ---
> J. David Eisenberg
> http://catcode.com/
>
Received on Saturday, 3 March 2001 19:02:53 UTC