W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2006

Re: overflow:none or min-width:auto/intrinsic?

From: Mikko Rantalainen <mikko.rantalainen@peda.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 13:21:43 +0300
Message-ID: <442BB137.6020109@peda.net>
To: www-style@w3.org

Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
> As far as I understand there is no way in CSS [1,2,3]
> to define rule:
> "set width of the block to 300px but not less than
> min-intrinsic width of its content"
> using existing set of attributes or/and values, am I right?
> [...]
> td { overflow:none; }
> -or-
> td { min-width: min-intrinsic; }
> [...]
> (I know that there are no such value as 'none' in overflow currently)

+1 for "min-width: min-intrinsic". I think that overflow shouldn't 
have such control over size of the blocks.

Should there be restrictions with intrinsic values? Does all of 
these make any sense (when applied alone to a single element):

min-width: min-intrinsic;
min-width: intrinsic;
min-width: max-intrinsic;

width: min-intrinsic;
width: intrinsic;
width: max-intrinsic;

max-width: min-intrinsic;
max-width: intrinsic;
max-width: max-intrinsic;

Received on Thursday, 30 March 2006 10:22:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:23 UTC