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

Re: [css21] ISSUE-138

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 23:00:51 -0400
Message-ID: <4C4A5763.6030408@mit.edu>
To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
CC: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 7/23/10 5:46 AM, Alex Mogilevsky wrote:
> 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 the issue here is the definition of "within".  Per the current 
spec text on block boxes inside inlines, for example, the block box is 
not in fact "within" the inline box (which is why the spec has to 
explicitly say that it's also affected by the relative positioning). 
Similar issues arise for out-of-flows.  There are, obviously, 
complications for auto-position abspos elements, since the positions of 
those _would_ be affected by relative positioning (as well as by lots of 
other things).

> 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

The only in-between aspect of this is the behavior of an in-flow block 
descendant of an inline, right?  I will put forward that _none_ of the 
behavior of these is exactly sane and understandable in the terms the 
spec describes them in (of breaking the inline, etc)...  I think what 
it's trying to get at is "treat it like an inline-block except with the 
regular block sizing behavior", but it's not quite that because the 
inline's borders and such don't get drawn around it...

-Boris
Received on Saturday, 24 July 2010 03:02:29 GMT

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