W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2003

Re: CSS3 box height %

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 16:05:29 -0400
Message-Id: <200308132005.QAA23507@scrubbing-bubbles.mit.edu>
To: Jens Meiert <jens.meiert@erde3.com>
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, bmills@andrew.cmu.edu, www-style@w3.org

> > <div id="parent" style="height: auto">
> >   <div id="child1" style="height: 10em" />
> >   <div id="child2" style="height: 70%" />
> >   <div id="child3" style="height: 70%" />
> > </div>
> 
> Boris -- What result do you expect here?

At the moment, I expect that child1 will be 10em tall, child2 and child3 will
be 0 tall (since they have no content), and parent will be 10em tall.  Adding
content to child2 and child3 would change that, of course.

There is no obviously "correct" rendering here, though.

> A common sense result IMO is an
> overall 10em height, even rendering the both 70% declared child elements as
> 10em, and thus making all definitions expect 'height: 10em' obsolete.

I'm not sure what you mean here.  Please explicitly state what the height of
each element should be (I even gave them IDs for easy reference).

> For me, the
> example implies an inconsequent use of the height property (resp. its
> values), because contradictory.

This is a very common example in the real world, unfortunately.

>    <a>
>      <b1> 1 </b1>
>      <b2> 2 </b2>
>      <b3> 3 </b3>
>    </a>
> 
>    * { display: block; }
>    a { height: 500px; }
>    b1 { height: 75%; }
>    b2, b3 { height: auto; }
> 
> ...and thus clarifying the only legal way to mix relative with absolute
> values? <b1 /> would obviously be 375px high, while allowing <b2 /> and <b3 /
> > to
> share its space.

This already works that way (since <a> is not auto-height),

Boris
-- 
Computer, n: 
   A device to speed up and automate errors
Received on Wednesday, 13 August 2003 16:35:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:23 GMT