- From: Kelly Miller <lightsolphoenix@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2005 00:46:10 -0400
- To: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
I figured I'd mention that there is also the CSS3 attribute box-sizing, which can be used to switch width and height to mean what you want. David Woolley wrote: >>I have read that the width and height of an object does not include the >>padding and border. If I am wrong then please cease reading. >> >> > >You can easily confirm this from the source document: > ><http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#blockwidth> > > > >>I really really really think that the width or height of an object >>should include the padding , at least. >> >> > >Very few people use padding. In general, one wants the content >size for images, not anything larger, and that's the only place >you should be using precise sizes. > > > >>If an item should be 100% (PERCENT) wide but the padding on the right >>side should always be 200px (PIXELS) ... ??? Tell how can this be done? >> >> > >How to do this for width should be fairly obvious from ><http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#blockwidth>. Ask me off list, >with a valid email reply address, if you want details. In most contexts >there is no containing height. > >Having an option to make width the overall width has been raised in >the past. The other proposal that has been made is to allow simple >expressions with mixed units (but many consider that is the thin end of >the wedge towards scripting). > > -- http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/ - Get Firefox! http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/ - Reclaim Your Inbox!
Received on Tuesday, 7 June 2005 04:46:24 UTC