- From: Germain Garand <germain@ebooksfrance.org>
- Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 21:39:39 +0100
- To: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
Le dimanche 1 mars 2009, Anton Prowse a écrit : > You misunderstand me. My "in that case" referred to fantasai's > suggestion that the second sentence be removed. If it is removed, the > list of causes of overflow contains: > > # * A descendent box is positioned absolutely, partly outside the box. oh, indeed, sorry > > and yet a relatively positioned descendant box, partly outside the box, > is equally a cause of overflow. (Irrelevant but noteworthy: unlike an > absolutely positioned descendants, but like static descendants, its > containing block cannot be higher up the chain than the overflow box and > so it will /always/ be clipped.) it makes sense, of course.. Greetings, Germain
Received on Sunday, 1 March 2009 20:40:57 UTC