- 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