- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:10:56 -0700
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 2:03 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote: > On Tuesday 2011-06-14 13:58 -0700, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> > I much prefer 'display' rather than 'position' (though we >> > really never should have had 'position' in the first place). >> >> I boggled when I heard this at the FtF. ^_^ position:absolute is too >> weak in CSS2.1, and thus of limited utility, but positioning in >> general is a good thing that is useful. It's just an alternate layout >> model that can operate simultaneously with other layout models. > > Ignoring the merits of absolute positioning, I think it should have > been display:absolute rather than position:absolute. Ah, okay, I misunderstood the objection. That makes perfect sense. (Assuming you split display, so that's actually a display-outside value.) Given the current state of the world, though, doesn't it make more sense to keep using 'position'? It's effectively the same thing, since you just compute to "display:block". ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 14 June 2011 21:11:51 UTC