- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 10:58:38 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
- Message-ID: <20061013175838.GB9274@ridley.dbaron.org>
On Friday 2006-10-13 10:56 -0700, L. David Baron wrote:
> On Friday 2006-10-13 16:47 +0000, Ian Hickson wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 13 Oct 2006, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> > >
> > > What if I have:
> > >
> > > .parent { height: 20px; min-height: 100px; }
> > > .child { height: 50% }
> > >
> > > and the same markup? Should the child end up 10px tall? Or 50px tall?
> >
> > 50px; the height is based on the height of the containing block which in
> > this case is 100px.
>
> It's nowhere near that obvious, since 10.5 says [1]:
>
> # <percentage>
> # [...] If the height of the containing block is not specified
> # explicitly (i.e., it depends on content height), and this
> # element is not absolutely positioned, the value computes to
> # 'auto'.
>
> The height of the containing block *does* in this case depend on the
> content height -- if the content had been taller than 100px, it
> would expand.
Er, sorry, I should look more closely at which testcase you're
quoting.
I suppose that is supported by the spec as currently written, so the
change I proposed in
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0087 is not
actually needed.
-David
--
L. David Baron <URL: http://dbaron.org/ >
Technical Lead, Layout & CSS, Mozilla Corporation
Received on Friday, 13 October 2006 17:58:47 UTC