- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 11:16:18 -0700
- To: www-style@gtalbot.org
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
2010/8/2 "Gérard Talbot" <www-style@gtalbot.org>: > Le Lun 2 aoūt 2010 16:17, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit : >> Opera collapses margins correctly in this case, same as anyone else. >> (Put a height and background on #second-static and check its position >> in Opera and other browsers.) > > I have done this right here: > > http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/margin-collapsing-and-abs-pos-Tab-Atkins.html > > My initial testcase (and Ian Hickson's testcases) involved empty divs with > margins. Right, the behavior is different if the first element is empty or not. I think everyone agrees about the rendering for that case? The differing behavior occurs when the first element is empty, and thus the margin-top of #second-static collapses all the way up into the top margin of #first-static. >> It's just computing the auto position differently, which it's allowed >> to do. (The spec only provides suggestions for how to calculate the >> auto position of abspos elements, and explicitly says in 10.3.7 that >> implementations are allowed to "guess at its probable position".) >> >> ~TJ > > Well, then, in such case, > > http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20100727/html4/abspos-021.htm > > should be rejected because the rendered layout can be rendered differently. I suspect that *any* testcases based on auto positioning of abspos elements should be rejected, due to the explicit allowance of different renderings. It sucks, and we *should* tighten that up, but right now it's not something testable, and implementations disagree in several situations. (For example, try absposing a table-cell with auto positions.) ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 3 August 2010 18:17:13 UTC