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

Re: [CSS 2.1] static position of an absolutely positioned element with auto-offsets

From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2008 22:35:49 +0200
Message-ID: <48499FA5.6060504@moonhenge.net>
To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>

fantasai wrote:
> 
> Ingo Chao wrote:
>> The static position is the position an element would have had in the
>> normal flow --  separated in vertical and horizontal direction.
>>
>> But this sentence seems to encourage diversity:
>> "...user agents are free to make a guess at its probable position"
>> (CSS 2.1: 10.3.7 and 10.6.4).
>>
>> IE places an absolutely positioned box with auto-offsets /alongside/ a
>> float. Does this behavior violate the spec or not? I think it should.
> 
> Would s/probable position/probable vertical position/ solve this problem?

The issue is that it is not clear why freedom was granted in the first 
place.  Maybe it was a nod to pre-existing UA diversity, but quite 
possibly it is because it is computationally expensive to first flow an 
AP element (and possibly surrounding elements) in order to calculate its 
static position and then to flow it (and them) again to render it as an 
AP for which different layout rules apply.  The underlying reason needs 
to be clarified before the value of any given resolution can be assessed.

Anton Prowse
http://dev.moonhenge.net
Received on Friday, 6 June 2008 20:36:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:07 GMT