- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:23:00 -0700
- To: Masataka Yakura <myakura.web@gmail.com>
- CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 07/04/2010 11:58 PM, Masataka Yakura wrote: > Just came across with this post: > <http://translate.google.co.jp/translate?u=http://tomato.myftp.org/blog/readone.php%3Fid%3D105&sl=ja&tl=en> > > The guy who wrote it wonders if there's a contradiction in CSS 2.1. > > 1. In "11.1.1 Overflow: the 'overflow' property" there's an example > stating "the<blockquote> to be clipped by the containing block." [1] > 2. In this case, the containing block is "formed by the content edge > of the nearest block-level, table cell or inline-block ancestor box." > [2] > 3. However, the overflow "specifies whether a box is clipped to its > padding edge," not the content edge. [3] > > That's what the guy basically says. I think that's not a contradiction > but I do think the example needs to be more accurate. Saying that the > <blockquote> is clipped by the "containing block" would only work for > this particular case, where the content edge is the same as the > padding edge. > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visufx.html#img-overflow1 > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visudet.html#containing-block-details > [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visufx.html#overflow-clipping I've filed this as an editorial issue; it should say "<div>'s padding box" or similar, not "containing block". ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 4 August 2010 21:23:36 UTC