W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2011

Re: [css3-ui] 'overflow-x' 'overflow-y' properties (was Re: [css3-selectors] What's the point of :empty?)

From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 21:09:30 -0700
Message-ID: <BANLkTikt13duWQmmOpbkzuZ9_Nas8hd9Ew@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Cc: robert@ocallahan.org, Rob Crowther <robertc@boogdesign.com>, David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 15:36, Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 20:11, David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 2, 2010, at 7:44 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 11:39 AM, David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com> wrote:
>>> Really the sticking point is overflow:hidden, which is commonly used in
>>> conjunction with text-overflow to truncate content in the inline direction.
>>> In the vertical direction nothing is clipped.  Think of a button built using
>>> inline-block that clips/truncates its content horizontally (with ellipses).
>>>  If you force the baseline to be the bottom margin edge just because
>>> overflow:hidden was specified, then you can no longer baseline align this
>>> control.
>>> What the spec says makes sense to me for overflow:auto/scroll, and we
>>> could change that in WebKit I think, but there's a problem with what is
>>> specified for overflow:hidden.
>> Sounds like what you really want is overflow-x:hidden, overflow-y:visible
>> ... with the baseline behavior depending only on overflow-y.
>> Yeah, that would be an acceptable solution.  Unfortunately CSS2.1 doesn't
>> define overflow-x and overflow-y and only talks in terms of overflow.
>>  That's really what creates the problem here.  Maybe the language could be
>> modified to state overflow in a particular direction without naming the
>> specific properties?
> I've accepted this an issue for CSS3-UI, that is, that CSS3 UI should
> define 'overflow-x' and 'overflow-y' properties.
> http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css3-ui#issue-19


After having looked at what it would take to properly define
overflow-x and overflow-y, the related text that would need to be
borrowed/copied from CSS 2.1, I'm convinced this is too big/risky of a
change to introduce into CSS3-UI at this time.

While I still think that CSS-UI (perhaps CSS4-UI) would make a fine
home for overflow-x and overflow-y, I'm also open to them remaining
instead in the CSS3 module: The box model [1].

In fact, the CSS3 Box Model Module could use an update to incorporate
all the changes/fixes that went into CSS 2.1 (which would probably be
better than effectively only updating the section on overflow for


[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-css3-box-20021024/

http://tantek.com/ - I made an HTML5 tutorial! http://tantek.com/html5
Received on Friday, 1 July 2011 04:10:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:02 UTC