- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 22:53:06 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>, Markus Ernst <derernst@gmx.ch>
- Cc: whatwg <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, Eric Seidel <eseidel@chromium.org>
On Wed, 4 Apr 2012, Ojan Vafai wrote:
>
> 1. We should add iframe[seamless] { display:block; }.
> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#embedded-content-2
> already expects iframe:not([seamless]) { border: 2px inset; }. In 90%
> percent of uses, seamless iframes will not want a border and will want
> to fill their container. This way, seamless iframes behave roughly like
> sandboxable divs, which is what web developers want.
Done.
> 2.
> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#attr-iframe-seamless
> "In visual media, in a CSS-supporting user agent: the user agent should
> set the intrinsic width of the iframe to the width that the element
> would have if it was a non-replaced block-level element with 'width:
> auto'."
>
> This doesn't get the behavior you'd want with cases that need
> shrink-wrapped behavior. Some cases that need handling:
> <iframe seamless style="display:inline">
> <iframe seamless style="display:inline-block">
> <iframe seamless style="float:left">
> <iframe seamless style="position:absolute">
Done.
On Wed, 4 Apr 2012, Ojan Vafai wrote:
>
> 3. The default margin on the body element inside a seamless iframe
> should be 0. Again, this is what 90%+ of uses will expect. We shouldn't
> require everyone using seamless iframes to have to set the body's margin
> to 0.
Done.
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 9 July 2012 22:54:47 UTC