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

Re: positioning and sizing an element relatively to any other element

From: sam <samuelp@iinet.net.au>
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 11:03:01 +0800
Message-ID: <4BA43AE5.7040506@iinet.net.au>
To: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 03/20/2010 04:21 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Tab Atkins Jr.<jackalmage@gmail.com>  wrote:
>    
>> 3) Since we're talking about height, it would also be awesome to have
>> a way to say "this should be the height of its container but no
>> larger". You'd think height: 100% would do that, but no, that seems to
>> make the box the height of its content, at least the last time I tried
>> it (yesterday). That's OK, though, we love you even though you're
>> eccentric, CSS. I think we just need a little something different,
>> here.
>>      
> Usually, the container's height is determined by its contents' height.
>   If the container has a fixed height, then its contents will always be
> fit into that height, as controlled by the overflow property.  What
> exactly would this change add?  What's an example syntax and an
> example of a case where it would do something that's not already
> pretty simple?
>
>
>    
Yes, I also did not understand what point 3 was getting at.  If height 
of container known, height:100% is that height, else there is a 
dependency loop and height resolves to 'auto'.  Seem like he is 
describing the case of applying height:100% where container height is 
not known/resolvable.
Received on Saturday, 20 March 2010 03:03:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:25 GMT