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

Re: [cssom-view] New WD "CSSOM View Module"

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:38:25 +0100
To: "Garrett Smith" <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com>
Cc: Www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.t64tebch64w2qv@annevk-t60.oslo.opera.com>

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 01:58:54 +0100, Garrett Smith <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com>  
wrote:
> The spec has standardized Microsoft properties in a way that is both
> inconsistent with Microsoft properties and what browsers do

As a general note. The specification has been based on tests. Some of  
those are here:

   http://dump.testsuite.org/2006/dom/style/offset/

I have not reverse engineered one specific browser. For instance, reverse  
engineering Internet Explorer would make this dependent on hasLayout and  
several other quirks Internet Explorer has. That would not be good.


> offsetLeft and offsetTop are wrong, too.
> "Return the distance as number of CSS pixels between the top border
> edge of the offsetParent of element A and the top border edge of
> element A."
>
> This is wrong. Only Opera does this.

Yeah, you mentioned that already. I should look into that. Thanks.


> It contradicts CSS 2.1 containing blocks and contradicts what browsers
> really do - and they all act differently WRT body element.

Yes, this specification tries to find a middle ground. I'm not sure what  
you mean with contradicting CSS 2.1. Where does that happen?


> CSSOM, as it is, is breaking the web.

It's a first public Working Draft, with several oustanding issues, that  
tries to define how various layout related attributes should work. It  
seems a bit of an overstatement to say that it breaks the Web...


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2008 12:33:37 GMT

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