Re: [css3-ui] 'resize' and 'overflow'

On Feb 15, 2012, at 7:24 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> On 2/15/12 9:22 PM, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu wrote:
>   # The ‘resize’ property applies to elements whose computed
>   # ‘overflow’ value is something other than ‘visible’. If
>   # ‘overflow’ is different in a particular axis (i.e. ‘overflow-x’
>   # vs. ‘overflow-y’), then this property applies to the dimension(s)
>   # which do not have the value ‘visible’.
> 
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-box/#overflow1 clearly says:
> 
>  The computed values of ‘overflow-x’ and ‘overflow-y’ are the same as
>  their specified values, except that some combinations with ‘visible’
>  are not possible: if one is specified as ‘visible’ and the other is
>  ‘scroll’ or ‘auto’, then ‘visible’ is set to ‘auto’.
> 
> So the only way to have overflow be "visible" in one direction but not the other is for the other direction to be "hidden".  Though I believe an earlier version called for that to become "auto" in the "visible" direction as well?  Certainly that's what Gecko does right now
> 
> 
> Firefox's current implementation is
> somehow in the middle as 'resize' doesn't apply to elements of which
> both 'overflow-x' and 'overflow-y' are 'visible'
> 
> Yes, because those actually stay as "visible" in the computed style.
> 
> The overall question about what the right behavior is remains, of course.
> 
> I don't really see why we tie resize to overflow state at all. Is there any harm in making resize work for overflow:visible. It most cases it would be a strange user experience, but I can conceive of legitimate uses.

I would be pretty awkward to draw the resize widget on top of the overflowing content. Might make it kind of hard to find.