- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 12:30:10 -0400
- To: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
On 8/27/10 9:02 AM, Øyvind Stenhaug wrote: > Well, if they increment the padding then they only do so for auto > height, not when the height of the outer div is explicitly set to 100px. Ah, ok. That's interesting.... For an auto-height div, putting the scrollbar into the padding is clearly the right behavior from the standpoint of authors. Otherwise any overflow:auto block with horizontal overflow and auto height would also be forced to have vertical overflow, right? So I think we should make sure that the spec handles that case well. >> It's not clear from section 11.1.1. whether the scrollbar insertion >> changes the used padding value or whether the scrollbar is supposed to >> "overflow" the padding, and if so in which direction. I would not >> expect it to overflow out, since that would make it overlap other >> content, so the options are either that the used padding is increased >> or the used width/height is decreased, right? Or I guess that the used >> margin is increased... > > Or the scrollbar is just painted on top of everything else, so that its > end edge equals the end edge of the padding area ("overflowing" inwards). That's the "used height/width is decreased" case, I think. At least that's the way I was thinking of it. > I've been wondering the same thing. I'm not sure why the text talks > about modifying the dimensions of "the containing block" (block? blocks? > as you mention further down, there isn't just one) and not just the used > width/height. > (<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Jan/0259.html>) I have no idea. :) > Well, in this case the computed value of 'height' should be 'auto' per > 10.5. My Safari/Firefox versions aren't as recent but they both seem to > honor that part (as does Opera). Oh, good catch. So the width differences are still relevant, but the heights being about half was a complete accident. And for width, the only case that was different was Opera's handling of the positioned block vs the other two engines' handling. > Yeah, I guess there are some bugs in the more general behavior, I just > focused on one case which seemed to be consistent. Yeah, ok. Let's stay on that one; as I said above, I think the consistent behavior is needed to make overflow:auto make sense. -Boris
Received on Friday, 27 August 2010 16:30:48 UTC