- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 12:10:45 -0500
- To: Brad Kemper <brkemper@comcast.net>
- CC: CSS Style <www-style@w3.org>
Brad Kemper wrote: > > > On Jan 7, 2008, at 11:36 AM, fantasai wrote: > >> There was a proposal for pretty much exactly this functionality quite >> awhile >> ago, with slightly different syntax >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2004Jan/0218.html > > That's pretty different from what I'm proposing. By the definition > given, position:center is a whole new positioning scheme, concerned > primarily with making sure the item is both vertically centered and > horizontally centered. > > What I proposed was a small, simple extension to position:absolute (and > position:fixed, and perhaps position:relative), which would continue to > work exactly as it did before, except that in addition to setting the > position of one or more of the four edges of the object, you could set > the position of the center of the object. > > It would not break any fundamental design principals. It would not break > incremental rendering, since positioned items are taken out of the flow. See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Jan/0168.html on incremental rendering. AFAICT your proposal and "position: center" don't have any fundamental differences aside from the syntax used to get various results and, in the less common cases, whether some results are possible. They are both absolute-positioning schemes and share the same layout advantages and disadvantages. I think the position: center scheme is less clear on what happens when e.g. 'left' is 'calc(50% + 5em)'... ~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 8 January 2008 17:10:51 UTC