Josh Hughes wrote: >>As far as I can see, adding align: would *add* confusion because it is >>ambigious as to what is being aligned, and unnecessary because there is >>already a suitable method for aligning a block that fits in well with the >>box model etc. >> >> > >I don't naturally think of margins when aligning something, and I >certainly wouldn't assume that margin: auto means setting a block's >margin to half the remaining space of the parent element. If we want to >get people to stop using depreciated HTML attributes like "align", >having *intuitive* css equivalents makes sense. > >And even with margin: auto, it only works on the left and right sides. >For vertical alignment you have to emulate table behavior to reproduce >valign. > >Have css "align" and "valign" properties (or some variation thereof) >and have them act exactly like the HTML counterparts. There wouldn't be >any confusion. > >Josh > > > > You're 100% right! <Arthur/>Received on Thursday, 5 June 2003 16:56:38 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:21 GMT