- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2023 00:41:41 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
That's the case *right now*, tho. Depending on whether the first stylesheet says `top: auto; bottom: auto;` or `top: 0; bottom: 0;`, the current spec causes the second stylesheet's `align-self` to resolve against *totally different elements/rectangles*, so the *former* is causing the *latter* to mean something very different. Heck, it's true even more directly - if the first stylesheet is expecting the `auto`s to mean it's positioned "where it would normally be", then the alignment in the second stylesheet will change that assumption. My suggestion, among other things, basically just swaps which property is "in control" here, so the non-default alignments always act the same (resolving against the abspos containing block, possibly with insets/outsets adjusting the rectangle a bit). No matter what we do, tho, there's a significant amount of "action at a distance" between the insets and the alignment properties. They have to be treated as a unit for positioning purposes, in both current spec and my suggestion. -- GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9124#issuecomment-1747854574 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 5 October 2023 00:41:43 UTC