- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 10:24:40 -0700
- To: "David Woolley" <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>, <www-style@w3.org>
To reproduce current behavior of UA's we can define default style of P (paragraphs) (intrinsic HTML 2/3.2/4.0 styles, if you wish) as WinIE, NN 4, Mosaic, etc. : P { width: auto; min-width: intrinsic; min-height: intrinsic; /* ?? */ overflow: any; /* does not matter as never happens */ .... } and for Gecko, Opera and other UA's as P { width: auto; min-width: 0px; overflow: visible; .... } /* TDs already has this in all UA's */ TD { width: auto; min-width: intrinsic; min-height: intrinsic; overflow: any; /* does not matter as never happens */ } BTW: 'auto' has exact physical meaning of 100%% in all cases where it used in current spec. But I really don't understand how to interpret this: .strange { box-sizing: border-box; min-width: intrinsic; padding: 4px; } 'intrinsic' here should include paddings following the current CSS3 spec. Is it good at all? Andrew Fedoniouk. http://terrainformatica.com > > > Seems like min-width: intrinsic will solve a problem and will satisfy > > everybody. > > No. You seem to be confusing min-width and width. What you really seem > to want to do is to set a minimum width but have the actual width be > determined by the contents. That is simply: > > width: auto; > min-width: <Fedoniouk's definition width> > > and you therefore don't need a new construct. >
Received on Tuesday, 18 May 2004 13:25:05 UTC