- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 11:58:45 -0800
- To: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
- Cc: CSS <www-style@w3.org>
On Tuesday 2008-01-22 13:49 -0600, David Hyatt wrote: > The spec is just plain wrong. The results it gives don't match the common > sense rendering that Web site authors would expect for: > > <iframe style="position:absolute;left:0;top:0;right:0;bottom:0"></iframe> > > If I specify a top, bottom, right and left of 0, then why on earth should > the object's intrinsic width or height override? It's completely > counter-intuitive that you can't use this pattern to stretch an iframe or > image in CSS2.1. Is the same true for images? I thought the issue here is that, for this case, iframes act somewhere between replaced and non-replaced, rather than that the rules for replaced elements in general were wrong. Is that not the case? -David -- L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ Mozilla Corporation http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Tuesday, 22 January 2008 19:58:57 UTC