W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2013

Re: [cssom-view] scrollWidth definition doesn't seem to match implementations very well

From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 15:37:15 +0200
To: "www-style list" <www-style@w3.org>, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Message-ID: <op.wxqv4dseidj3kv@simons-macbook-pro.local>
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 06:46:33 +0200, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:

> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/cssom-view/#dom-element-scrollwidth doesn't  
> really make sense in various ways and doesn't seem to match any browsers  
> (e.g. in the case when the element is statically positioned).
>
> See also discussion in  
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=678678

On Wed, 13 Jun 2012 04:43:24 +0200, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:

> There are two issues here:
>
> 1)  For things that are scrollable the use of "content height" makes no
>      sense.  I believe this has been raised previously... and nothing
>      happened.

>
> For issue #1, the spec just needs to be fixed to say something useful.

On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 18:26:27 +0100, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:

> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=589081 shows 210 in all  
> modern browsers.  Per the definition currently in the spec I _think_ it  
> should say 220, because that definition talks about adding up the  
> paddings and the "content width", but the content can (and in this case  
> does) overlap the paddings.
>
> I believe in this instance the spec is what's wrong, not the  
> implementations.

https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/rev/1e2cd9ff56f4
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/rev/1398c808e617

Please let me know if I missed something or broke something.

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 01:09:54 +0200, Robert O'Callahan  
<robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
>
>> 2)  For things that are not scrollable the current text says to return
>>    the padding-box dimensions, but the only UAs that actually do that
>>    are WebKit and IE9 in IE7 mode.  Everyone else, including IE9 in
>>    other modes, returns border-box dimensions, according to
>>    https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/**show_bug.cgi?id=755971#c57<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755971#c57>and
>>    https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/**show_bug.cgi?id=755971#c61<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755971#c61>
>>
>
> I think padding-box dimensions are the only logical choice, since for a
> scrollable element the scrollWidth/scrollHeight never include the  
> element's
> borders.

I agree.

-- 
Simon Pieters
Opera Software
Received on Monday, 27 May 2013 13:37:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 27 May 2013 13:37:33 UTC