W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2008

RE: [CSS2.1 position:relative] Blocks Contained in Inline Relative.

From: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@exchange.microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:44:28 -0800
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <04F36FB4ED0F85459AA447F72711526F01289FEA82FE@DF-GRTDANE-MSG.exchange.corp.microsoft.com>

Yes, I did in fact mean "inline element", not inline block. Sorry... I don't think there is anything ambiguous about inline blocks as containers...


-----Original Message-----
From: L. David Baron [mailto:dbaron@dbaron.org]
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 12:39 PM
To: Alex Mogilevsky
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: [CSS2.1 position:relative] Blocks Contained in Inline Relative.


Er, did you mean inline or inline-block?

You wrote inline block here (but maybe meant inline box?):

On Thursday 2008-02-07 11:59 -0800, Alex Mogilevsky wrote:
> When a block with a static position is contained in an inline block with "position:relative", should the relative offset apply to it?

...but then wrote inline here:

> 10.1. http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#containing-block-details
> Clearly says that the relative inline is clearly not the containing block for nested blocks.

I think I answered the question assuming you meant inline and
fantasai answered it assuming you meant inline-block.

-David

--
L. David Baron                                 http://dbaron.org/
Mozilla Corporation                       http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2008 20:44:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:01 GMT