W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2005

Re: RE Bounding box

From: Kelly Miller <lightsolphoenix@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2005 00:46:10 -0400
Message-ID: <42A52692.7080603@gmail.com>
To: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
CC: www-style@w3.org

I figured I'd mention that there is also the CSS3 attribute box-sizing, 
which can be used to switch width and height to mean what you want.

David Woolley wrote:

>>I have read that the width and height of an object does not include the
>>padding and border. If I am wrong then please cease reading.
>>    
>>
>
>You can easily confirm this from the source document:
>
><http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#blockwidth>
>
>  
>
>>I really really really think that the width or height of an object
>>should include the padding , at least.
>>    
>>
>
>Very few people use padding.  In general, one wants the content
>size for images, not anything larger, and that's the only place
>you should be using precise sizes.
>
>  
>
>>If an item should be 100% (PERCENT) wide but the padding on the right
>>side should always be 200px (PIXELS) ... ??? Tell how can this be done?
>>    
>>
>
>How to do this for width should be fairly obvious from
><http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#blockwidth>.  Ask me off list,
>with a valid email reply address, if you want details.  In most contexts
>there is no containing height.
>
>Having an option to make width the overall width has been raised in
>the past.  The other proposal that has been made is to allow simple
>expressions with mixed units (but many consider that is the thin end of
>the wedge towards scripting).
>  
>

-- 
http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/ - Get Firefox!
http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/ - Reclaim Your Inbox!
Received on Tuesday, 7 June 2005 04:46:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:37 GMT