Re: [CSS21] Objection over Issue 203 (clearance and hypothetical position) (Was: Re: [CSS21] Clearance - the missing manual)

On 24/03/2011 21:37, fantasai wrote:
> On 03/24/2011 01:24 PM, fantasai wrote:
> While we're in this section, Arron and I noticed that the first paragraph
> of the first clearance example is self contradicting (B2 has no children,
> but is not empty?) and involves more complication than need be (the
> possibility of self-collapsing margins due to no padding, no border, and
> no children):
>
> # Example 1. Assume (for the sake of simplicity), that we have just
> # three boxes, in this order: block B1 with a bottom margin of M1
> # (B1 has no children and no padding or border), floating block F
> # with a height H, and block B2 with a top margin of M2 (no padding
> # or border, no children). B2 has 'clear' set to 'both'. We also
> # assume B2 is not empty.
>
> Here's a suggested replacement:
>
> | Example 1. Assume (for the sake of simplicity), that we have just
> | three boxes, in this order: block B1 with *a bottom border and*
> | a bottom margin of M1, floating block F with an *outer* height H,
> | and block B2 with *a top border and* a top margin of M2. B2 has
> | 'clear' set to 'both'.
>
> Also, this sentence was very confusing:
> # We need to compute clearance C twice, C1 and C2, and keep the
> # greater of the two: C = max(C1,C2).
>
> I suggest replacing "twice" (which isn't what really happens) with
> "as two separate calculations", thus:
> | We need to compute clearance C as two separate calculations, C1
> | and C2, and keep the greater of the two: C = max(C1,C2).

Sure ;-)

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jan/0087.html, issue #9

Cheers,
Anton Prowse
http://dev.moonhenge.net

Received on Thursday, 24 March 2011 21:06:55 UTC