W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2004

Re: where is overflow:none ?

From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 10:24:40 -0700
Message-ID: <001701c43cfd$01529bc0$0401a8c0@AFedoniouk>
To: "David Woolley" <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>, <www-style@w3.org>

To reproduce current behavior of UA's
we can define default style of P (paragraphs)  (intrinsic HTML 2/3.2/4.0
styles, if you wish) as

WinIE, NN 4, Mosaic, etc. :

P {
width: auto;
min-width: intrinsic;
min-height: intrinsic; /* ?? */
overflow: any; /* does not matter as never happens */
....
}

and for Gecko, Opera and other UA's as

P {
width: auto;
min-width: 0px;
overflow: visible;
....
}

/* TDs already has this in all UA's */
TD {
width: auto;
min-width: intrinsic;
min-height: intrinsic;
overflow: any; /* does not matter as never happens */
}

BTW: 'auto' has exact physical meaning of 100%% in all cases where it used
in current spec.

But I really don't understand how to interpret this:

.strange {
   box-sizing: border-box;
   min-width: intrinsic;
   padding: 4px;
}

'intrinsic' here should include paddings following the current CSS3 spec.
Is it good at all?

Andrew Fedoniouk.
http://terrainformatica.com



>
> > Seems like min-width: intrinsic will solve a problem and will satisfy
> > everybody.
>
> No.  You seem to be confusing min-width and width.  What you really seem
> to want to do is to set a minimum width but have the actual width be
> determined by the contents.  That is simply:
>
> width: auto;
> min-width: <Fedoniouk's definition width>
>
> and you therefore don't need a new construct.
>
Received on Tuesday, 18 May 2004 13:25:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:30 GMT