W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2012

Re: [CSS21] min-height: 100% in html, body

From: Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 00:54:18 -0500
Message-ID: <ddddd1c90d159100df9b08137f66f381.squirrel@ed-sh-cp3.entirelydigital.com>
To: "Philippe Wittenbergh" <ph.wittenbergh@l-c-n.com>
Cc: "Lea Verou" <leaverou@gmail.com>, "W3C www-style mailing list" <www-style@w3.org>

Le Jeu 26 janvier 2012 23:48, Philippe Wittenbergh a écrit :
>
> On Jan 27, 2012, at 12:43 PM, Gérard Talbot wrote:
>
>> …
>
>>  html
>>  {
>>  height: auto;
>>  min-height: 100%;
>>  }
>> is not resolvable; as I am trying to understand your point of view,
>> Philippe, this is what you're basically saying.
>
> Well browsers resolve that as being the height of the viewport.
>
> html {
> 	min-height: 100%;
> 	border-left: 50px solid green;
> }
>
> You'll see a border on the left from top to bottom of the viewport.
>
>> ...
>> Since 'height: auto' is not resolvable, then such comparison is also not
>> doable. Okay, Philippe: I see your point.
>
> My point is that, given
> html, body {
> 	min-height: 100%;
> }
>
> the min-height on body computes to '0', as the height of the parent block
> cannot be resolved. Indeed.

I have re-edited all the tests to include 'height: auto' when such
declaration was implied but not explicit.

Section 10.6.3 is applied:
"
If 'height' is 'auto', the height depends on whether the element has any
block-level children and whether it has padding or borders (...)
"
10.6.3 Block-level non-replaced elements in normal flow when 'overflow'
computes to 'visible'
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#the-height-property


>

>> On the other hand,
>> html {height: 100%;} is.
>>
>> So, this leaves me with at least 4 tests with predictable layout.
>>
>> The following 4 tests are correct, should be correct:
>
> Test 1 and 2 are correct (and browsers handle that as expected: lime
> background).

We will include
'height: 100%' set on html, 'height: 100%' set on body, 'height: 100%' set
on p

http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/height-percentage-003a.xhtml

in the test suite.


>
>> 3-
>> 'height: 100%' set on html, 'min-height: 100%' set on body, 'height:
>> 100%'
>> set on p (h, m, h):
>>
>> http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/min-height-percentage-005.xhtml
>
> This should fail. This is similar to Lea's initial test case. The height
> of body is 'auto', 'height: 100%' on the child <p> is auto. CSS 2.1:10.5
> again.
>
>> 4-
>> 'height: 100%' set on html, 'min-height: 100%' set on body, 'min-height:
>> 100%' set on p (h, m, m):
>>
>> http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/min-height-percentage-004.xhtml
>
> This should fail for the same reason as the third test case.

I see the whole picture now. Yes, I think you're right.

I may include one or a few tests (but entirely reworked) into the test
suite so that such cases are covered and help solve issues with web
authors or prevent some bugs to be filed in a bug tracking system.

Thank you for your analysis, Philippe!

Gérard (who is very busy)
-- 
CSS 2.1 Test suite RC6, March 23rd 2011
http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/toc.html

Contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/

Web authors' contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/web-authors-contributions-css21-testsuite.html
Received on Friday, 27 January 2012 05:54:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:49 GMT