- From: sam <samuelp@iinet.net.au>
- Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 11:03:01 +0800
- To: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
- CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 03/20/2010 04:21 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Tab Atkins Jr.<jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > >> 3) Since we're talking about height, it would also be awesome to have >> a way to say "this should be the height of its container but no >> larger". You'd think height: 100% would do that, but no, that seems to >> make the box the height of its content, at least the last time I tried >> it (yesterday). That's OK, though, we love you even though you're >> eccentric, CSS. I think we just need a little something different, >> here. >> > Usually, the container's height is determined by its contents' height. > If the container has a fixed height, then its contents will always be > fit into that height, as controlled by the overflow property. What > exactly would this change add? What's an example syntax and an > example of a case where it would do something that's not already > pretty simple? > > > Yes, I also did not understand what point 3 was getting at. If height of container known, height:100% is that height, else there is a dependency loop and height resolves to 'auto'. Seem like he is describing the case of applying height:100% where container height is not known/resolvable.
Received on Saturday, 20 March 2010 03:03:35 UTC