Andrew Fedoniouk wrote: > > >> I'm not sure if this has been discussed before, but the display >> property has a minor problem. Often, {display: none} is used with dynamic >> html, where an element could show or hide on demand. Hiding is easy, >> but once you need to reshow the element, you need to know the >> appropriate display mode. There are many to choose from, and cannot >> safely be derived from the element name. >> Since changing the display mode of an element is essentially different >> from just hiding it, wouldn't it be better if this was handled by >> the visibility property? So {visibility: none} would work like >> {display: none} and take the element out of the flow, as opposed to >> {visibility: hidden} which makes the element invisible while it >> remains in the flow. Would you want it to behave like "display: none", or to actually collapse to zero-height (which is different)? In the latter case, it would still affect the horizontal size of boxes that shrink-wrap around it. This is better for dynamic effects since it restricts layout changes to the y dimension, and it is closer to what "visibility: collapse" does for table rows. ~fantasaiReceived on Friday, 27 July 2007 21:58:45 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:51 GMT