W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2009

Re: [CSS21] Another ambiguity in the definition of "containing block"

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:32:53 -0400
Message-ID: <4AC236B5.9060205@mit.edu>
To: Giovanni Campagna <scampa.giovanni@gmail.com>
CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 9/29/09 12:14 PM, Giovanni Campagna wrote:
> Rigth. Maybe putting some content inside the float could clarify
> what's happening (not rendered, 0px height, auto height with no
> content)

I did check this, of course, though you're welcome to trivially modify 
the markup I sent and check yourself.  Webkit is using auto height here.

> Not in any case, but it works for block-level elements. Table-cells
> may be treated differently, if we wish to preserve compatibility (and
> to choose the most sensible approach, imho). Inline-blocks have no
> problems, because they're never inferred from other boxes.

OK.  So you agree that 10.1 needs changes to actually make sense in all 
cases.  Good.  ;)  Now can we get those changes made (or at least an 
issue in the issue tracker on figuring out what changes are needed)?

I should note that my original claim that there's ambiguity here is 
pretty clearly true.  If the Webkit folks did something totally 
different from everyone else and what they did seems somewhat reasonable 
per the existing text (and I think it was) then the existing text is 
ambiguous, period.

Received on Tuesday, 29 September 2009 16:33:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:07:39 UTC