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

Re: box-sizing: border-box;

From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 21:43:10 -0800
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Scott Romack <sromack@ptsteams.com>
Cc: <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BBC4933B.2F35B%tantek@cs.stanford.edu>

On 10/28/03 11:33 AM, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU> wrote:

>> My statement is simple I don't like the content-box model! could someone
>> persuade me otherwise? I just don't understand why if I say; div
>> {width:200px;padding:7px;border:2px} that width dosn't mean 200px.
> Note that adding the box-sizing property would involve expanding the section
> on
> computing widths and heights a good deal (as well as changing what "computed
> width" actually means, possibly).
> For example, what is the correct layout of:
> width: 10px; padding: 5px; border: 6px
> with border-box sizing?

What is the only reasonable interpretation of this overconstrained

Since negative content widths are illegal, it makes sense for the computed
content width to be set to 0 in this case.

Received on Wednesday, 29 October 2003 00:39:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:09 UTC