- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:30:22 -0800
- To: Peter Moulder <peter.moulder@monash.edu>, www-style@w3.org
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 7:59 PM, Peter Moulder <peter.moulder@monash.edu> wrote: > Section 8.5.1 describes some constraints on the meanings of 'thin', > 'medium' and 'thick', but I note that the current text allows them to be > non-positive lengths. (The existing text forbids only explicit <length> > values being negative.) > > I seem to recall that a problem arises if borders can in fact be > negative, though I'm afraid forget what problem; maybe something to do > with it allowing the width and height of the border box to be negative? Yeah, we don't want anything but the outer box to have negative width/height. Margins handle being negative; nothing else has the right handling for it. > I suggest adding some constraint as to (or some discussion concerning) > whether 'thin' can be negative or zero, e.g. by prepending ‘0 ≤’ or ‘0 <’ > to the existing line of inequalities. > > If 'thin' etc. are allowed to be zero, then I think 8.3.1 (collapsing > margins) would benefit from some text drawing authors' attention to the > possibility that these keyword values aren't necessarily enough to ensure > a non-empty border area. 'thin' shouldn't be allowed to be zero. At minimum, it should be a hairline. ~TJ
Received on Monday, 10 January 2011 21:31:15 UTC