W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2009

Re: [CSS21] Clipping abspos elements

From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:05:02 +0100
Message-ID: <49AAA41E.5000109@moonhenge.net>
To: www-style@w3.org


fantasai wrote:
> David Hyatt wrote:
>  >
>  > On Feb 10, 2009, at 2:07 PM, fantasai wrote:
>  >
>  >>
>  >> I got a question about this bit of text in 11.1
>  >> <http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visufx.html>:
>  >>
>  >>  # In certain cases, a box may overflow, meaning its content lies
>  >>  # partly or entirely outside of the box, e.g.:
>  >>  # ...
>  >>  # A descendent box is positioned absolutely, partly outside the box.
>  >>  # Such boxes are not always clipped by the overflow property on
>  >>  # their ancestors.
>  >>
>  >> Can't figure out what that "Such boxes are not always clipped" sentence
>  >> is talking about. An implementor was wondering if it meant abspos
>  >> descendents are /not/ supposed to be clipped by "overflow: hidden".
>  >> I'm quite sure that's not the case, so, perhaps we could either clarify
>  >> what is meant or remove the sentence.
>  >
>  > overflow clipping follows the containing block hierarchy.  An
>  > unpositioned element with overflow:hidden that has an absolutely
>  > positioned child will not clip that child.  However a relative
>  > positioned element with overflow:hidden that has an absolutely
>  > positioned child would clip that child, since it is the containing block
>  > for the child.
>
> Ok, that's what I thought it was talking about.
>
> I think, given the intent of the section and what it says about
> other things... that that sentence should be removed.

In that case, can we change "positioned absolutely" to just 
"positioned", else it looks as if relative positioning is deliberately 
omitted.

Cheers,
Anton Prowse
http://dev.moonhenge.net
Received on Sunday, 1 March 2009 15:05:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:17 GMT