- From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 09:55:53 -0700
- To: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>, Joachim Noreiko <jnoreiko@yahoo.com>
- CC: <www-style@w3.org>
But given the loose definition of "shrink-wrap" for floats without width etc., the question is, which implementation is actually preferable? I have seen *numerous* cases where it is *very* helpful to a layout to be able to place a float or inline-block on a "line" that "takes up the rest of the space on the line". Currently 'float' allows you to do this (as the bug illustrates). I think it would be a shame to lose this functionality. It would be more preferable to determine what needs to be errata'd in the spec to allow for this very useful functionality, since it has been interoperably implemented. Tantek On 7/21/03 9:32 AM, "David Hyatt" <hyatt@apple.com> wrote: > > Mozilla's rendering is correct. Safari also puts the second float > below the first. > > dave > > On Monday, July 21, 2003, at 9:16AM, Joachim Noreiko wrote: > >> >> Could I ask the experts on this list for an >> interpretation? >> >> Based on my understanding of floats, I thought this >> was a Mozilla rendering bug: >> >> http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=128086&action=view >> >> The same page in IE and Opera puts the second box >> beside the first: their top borders are aligned. >> >> Who is correct? >> >> (The bug report is here: >> http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213190 ) >> >> >> _______________________________________________________________________ >> _ >> Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! >> Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/ >> >
Received on Monday, 21 July 2003 12:56:34 UTC