- From: Ian Hickson <py8ieh@bath.ac.uk>
- Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 21:44:04 +0100 (BST)
- To: Tantek Celik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- cc: Sjoerd Visscher <sjoerd@heeten.nl>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Tantek Celik wrote:
>>> The current CSS3 drafts introduce a property which can be used to
>>> change what 'width' actually means, called 'box-sizing'. It
>>> currently takes the values 'content-box' and 'border-box'; I
>>> propose we add 'padding-box' and 'margin-box' for consistency.
>
> We could not come up with any "real world" examples where an author
> would want to use "padding-box" where "border-box" wouldn't work
> just as well.
>
> Similarly with "margin-box". "margin-box" would also introduce the
> additional complication of collapsable/overlapping heights - since
> adjacent vertical margins collapse. We did *not* want to go there.
Ok, fair points.
Thankfully, using a transformation step (e.g. going through XSL), it
is possible to simulate 'margin-box' by wrapping the contents in a
block and then setting the width on that.
For example:
<div style="float: right; width: 50%">
<div style="margin: 2em; border: solid 2em; padding: 2em;">
</div>
</div>
...has the same effect as:
<div style="width: 50%; float: right; box-sizing: margin-box;
margin: 2em; border: solid 2em; padding: 2em;">
</div>
...so limiting 'box-sizing' is not really a blocker.
--
Ian Hickson
"I take a Professor Bullett approach to my answers. There's a high
probability that they may be right."
-- Dr Snow; Mechanics Lecturer at Bath University; 1999-03-04
Received on Sunday, 10 October 1999 16:44:08 UTC