- From: Oriol Brufau via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2024 22:00:34 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> The statement above seems to describe two scenarios I don't understand what you are saying. It's clearly talking about "the top and bottom margins of a box are adjoining" scenario. Of course this collapsed margin can then also collapse with other adjoining margins from other elements. > Here, the first and third `<div>` elements collapse over the second `<div>` The bottom margin of the first div, the top & bottom margins of the 2nd one, and the top margin of the 3rd one are all collapsing together. > This is unclear. What specific relationships affect the positioning of the element? It's literally defined immediately below. As you are quoting. So you read it. I'm very confused. > This seems to address case (b) where a child’s top and bottom margins collapse with the parent’s margins No, the "Otherwise" clearly covers other cases. > it is unclear what practical behavior this rule defines or why this alignment is significant. The position of the element is observable, e.g. via `outline`. So it needs to be defined. > This suggests that elements being collapsed through may still have descendants Yes. > However, this seems contradictory, as the content area of an element with children appear to prevent margins from "collapsing through it". No contradiction. You only need the descendants to collapse through. > which "elements" are being referenced here These: "Note that the positions of elements that have been collapsed through" -- GitHub Notification of comment by Loirooriol Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11306#issuecomment-2510269144 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Sunday, 1 December 2024 22:00:35 UTC