- From: Rod Dav4is <dav4is@bigfoot.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 11:03:30 -0400
- To: L-www-style <www-style@w3.org>
My proposal is, instead of a new property, to add a new optional modifier value that can be added to any of the extant width/height properties. For the nonce, let's call the new modifier "outside", and make it applicable only to length and percent values on width, length, and the min- and max- variants. Like the box-sizing defined in the css3 draft copy, this modifier would cause conforming UAs to compute the content width by subtracting the appropriate border and padding widths. My proposal differs in that the appropriate margin widths are also subtracted. In the case of collapsed margins, 1/2 of the width of the collapsed margin is subtracted. I believe the advantages of this proposal to be: 1. It becomes much simpler to code adjacent boxes to exactly fill a container space. Using percentages would be easiest, and the only requirement is that their "outside" dimensions, albeit width or length, add up to 100%. o Modifying pages becomes much simpler and less prone to error. In the context of use of the "outside" modifier, border widths, for example, can be changed at will without concern for "breaking" the fit. The content width is automatically adjusted accordingly. (If the content object no longer fits, this is to be treated no differently than an incorrect width value in CSS2.) 2. The problem of mixed metrics on the various box components disappears. 3. As a new modifier to extant properties, documents using it will cause legacy UAs to ignore the whole width (height) property as coded. What may seem a liability is actually an advantage. o As a new property, box-sizing will cause legacy UAs to use the coded width (height) without subtracting the border and padding lengths. The author had coded the width (height) with the expectation of the reduction, so the result width (length) in the legacy environment will likely be too large, causing overflow. o As an addition to an existing property, my proposal would cause legacy UAs to completely ignore the coded width (length) property, causing it to revert to "auto". This is much more likely to render in legacy UAs in more pleasing fashion than would box-sizing. Comments? -- Regards, Rod Dav4is / P.O. Box 118 / Hyde Park, NY 12538 / USA Genealogy, et Cetera: http://dav4is.8m.com 219 ancestral families, mostly 17th-19th century New England, total population: 55,224 Also: http://www.gencircles.com/users/dav4is/
Received on Friday, 15 June 2001 11:03:34 UTC