- From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
- Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2008 22:35:49 +0200
- 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 UTC