- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:38:53 -0700
- To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@exchange.microsoft.com>
- CC: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Alex Mogilevsky wrote: > This passage in the spec is actually one of my favorites. "free to make a guess" is a great way > to define things! > > On IE behavior: > > * in IE up to IE7, "static" position of a positioned object is determined as if it was an inline > element with zero width. When this was implemented (many years ago) we believed that since > absolute elements always become blocks, it is logical to produce same result for absolutely > positioned blocks and inlines. > > * However, by now there appears to be a consensus in other browser that static position for a > block element on the next line, as if it was in fact a block. > > * IE8 (in standards mode) changes the guessing algorithm to also pay attention to "display" > property and put static position of a block in the next line, with appropriate alignment. > > On the spec: > > It is hard to define exactly what position an element "would have had" in normal flow because if > it was in flow it would affect the document. The only way to define that precisely is to actually > layout with the element in flow, take its position, then relayout without the element. That would > be costly, and most likely less predictable. I believe this was the reason the "free to make a guess" wording was used here. Alex, do we need to make a clarification here to avoid the IE<8 interpretation? I would have expected that the "if its 'position' property had been 'static'" bit would require guessing the position using the specified (not used) display property. ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 9 June 2008 20:39:31 UTC