- 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