W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2010

Re: Issue 138 proposed text

From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 21:37:14 -0700
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20100714043714.GA10647@pickering.dbaron.org>
On Thursday 2010-06-03 15:19 -0700, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> I suggest changing the last sentence to instead read:
> 
> "When such an inline box is affected by relative positioning, the
> relative positioning affects all the boxes that were originally
> contained within the inline box, including the block box causing the
> break."

This seems like it might be too strong.  It seems like it might
imply that floats inside the inline box are affected by the relative
positioning, even though the inline box is not in their containing
block chain.  (See the test at
http://dbaron.org/css/test/2010/css21-issue-138-simple-float-test ,
which at least in Gecko and Chromium shows that floats are affected
by the relative positioning of their containing block but not by an
inline that is in their ancestor chain but inside their containing
block.)

However, floats inside a block inside the inline probably should be,
since their containing block is affected by the relative positioning
(which is more the point of this issue).

Would it be better to say simply that the relative positioning "also
affects the block box contained by the inline" instead of "also
affects the block box"?

-David

-- 
L. David Baron                                 http://dbaron.org/
Mozilla Corporation                       http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Wednesday, 14 July 2010 04:37:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:29 GMT