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

Re: flowing around both sides of a float

From: James Elmore <James.Elmore@cox.net>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 08:13:50 -0800
Message-Id: <839AE7A7-1377-4262-9469-9B8DE7594860@cox.net>
To: Brad Kemper <brkemper@comcast.net>, CSS <www-style@w3.org>

On Jan 2, 2008, at 11:51 PM, Brad Kemper wrote:
> I would say we want much the same thing, but would specify it  
> differently. I would do it by giving absolute positioning as a  
> value of float, and you would do it by giving certain float-like  
> capabilities to absolutely positioned items.
> I think your "wrap" attribute makes sense only for absolutely  
> positioned items, but I can't see any use for it for static or  
> relatively positioned items (or even what those terms would mean  
> with wrap applied to them). Correct me if I am wrong about that.

Last summer, I posted a more complete defense of this proposal,  
including use cases for positioning and 'wrapping' relative,  
absolute, and even relative to a particular block. If you don't have  
access to the archives, I would be happy to send you the links or  
even copy the text so you can see what I have already posted without  
duplicating everything for the entire group.

> I would hope that any experienced CSS user would recognize both  
> "absolute" and "float" too. But "wrap" would be something new. The  
> familiarity of the words "absolute" and "float" and the newness of  
> "wrap" and what it does (applying only to absolutely or fixedly  
> positioned items) makes my way a little better, IMAO (In My  
> Arrogant Opinion).

I am not so arrogant that I believe my suggestion is perfect. I have  
already found one problem with it, thanks to your 'arrogant' opinion.  
So be proud of your ideas, just don't think they are perfect.

> I can easily imagine wanting to position something above two other  
> blocks and having the inline content of those blocks flow around it  
> (as well as their non-positioned floats).

This has been suggested numerous times before in this group.  
Positioning a block and having the contents of other blocks which it  
intersects flow around it is the general case of the problem I (or  
perhaps we) are trying to solve.

>> Maybe we could use 'position: float;' That would tell the  
>> rendering engine that the EXACT position of the element is not  
>> fixed, only suggested, and that it would have to move to make  
>> space for other 'floated' elements.
> Hmm. Or maybe it would depend on z-axis, or on the relationship of  
> the item to the other floats (siblings, "cousins", etc.).

After I sent this off, I also thought that we could include the  
elements which are to be 'floated' in a common block and float the  
block. This is a less than ideal solution, but at least answers some  
of the questions. Does anyone else out there have a better idea?

James Elmore
Received on Thursday, 3 January 2008 16:14:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:32 UTC