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

Re: [css21] ISSUE-138

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 09:19:22 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTimbGjFAxNBTey_k8TXu_povEe-Hv5414+SesZd1@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 2:46 AM, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote:
> I have missed part of the conversation apparently and what I have agreed with is not exactly what is in the final text...
>
> The behavior where floats are not affected by inline relative container is in fact closer to Quirks Mode behavior. We have changed that, I believe in IE6, with understanding that relative positioning should affect everything within the relative container, including
>
> * blocks
> * floats
> * fixed-positioned elements
>
> I think I can live with either solution, but it seems to me the model would be the most consistent and understandable if "relative" affected all of the above. Or none. An in-between solution seems strange, especially as it will bring some compatibility issues in an any case.
>
> See the attached test for comparison.

Hm, okay.  My reasoning (and dbaron's) was that floats position
themselves solely based on their containing block (and fellow floats).
 If their containing block is somewhere higher than the inline, then,
they shouldn't be repositioned.

Hm, though.  The *horizontal* position of a float is based solely on
its containing block and fellow floats.  The vertical position,
though, is based solely on the preceding content and fellow floats.
So, what happens if the inline is relposed vertically?  The example
given previously only did a horizontal movement.

Like you, I can go either way on the matter.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 23 July 2010 16:20:14 GMT

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