- From: Daniel Holbert via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2026 21:05:33 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I agree with Oriol, yeah; that Gecko commit was wrong to reference the static-position-rectangle (and apply rules about it for relpos/stickypos). That commit referenced https://drafts.csswg.org/css-position/#staticpos-rect which is a sub-section of section 3.5 "Absolute (and Fixed) Positioning". And officially, relative-positioning doesn't use the "static position"; instead, the relpos spec text says: > "The box is laid out as for `static`" ...and the relpos/stickypos text never references the "static position" or "static-position rectangle". (Often "laid out as for static" is equivalent to "placed at the static position", but in this case where auto margins are involved, they don't mean the same thing.) -- GitHub Notification of comment by dholbert Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/12852#issuecomment-4172964049 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 1 April 2026 21:05:34 UTC