- From: Ian Kilpatrick via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2025 16:29:17 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Is this in regards to using position-area? You're correct that this would be the case in the second example, which shows what is currently possible. If you use position-area in the second example that has inset: 0, then the positioned element would be relying on overflow handling, and would be completely outside the generated containing block. The proposal (as I understand it) would mean the same geometry for both examples (left/right/etc tracking having zero size). > This proposal would fix that- the new containing block for the positioned element would be generated by the parent div's containing block, which very well could be larger than the parent itself. So I think you are asking for the anchored element to escape the default containing-block, but thats a different ask from allowing the containing-block to provide geometry as a valid anchor (people have been asking for this, but its a different ask). A potential solution might be to allow abspos to skip containing blocks where there isn't a viable anchor within scope for example. -- GitHub Notification of comment by bfgeek Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11769#issuecomment-2769929520 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 1 April 2025 16:29:18 UTC