- From: Giuseppe Bilotta <giuseppe.bilotta@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 14:33:56 +0200
- To: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr> wrote:
> Le 20/08/2012 12:05, Giuseppe Bilotta a écrit :
>
>> (Of course, all this would not
>> be an issue if CSS had a way to specify that a container should wrap
>> its content 'tightly'.)
>
>
> Do you mean "width: fit-content" as defined in css3-sizing?
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-sizing/#width-height-keywords
>From a cursory reading, this seems to look like what I'm trying to achieve.
> Until fit-content is supported well enough, you can get the same behavior
> with floats or inline-blocks. (But of course this comes attached with all
> the other behaviors of such boxes.)
Neither floats nor inline-blocks suffice to achieve what I want. I do
use inline-blocks, the #container wraps a number of divs which have
display: inline-block; however, if the #content is not sized _exactly_
as the number of blocks (+ margins) that would fit inside the
viewport, I get extra whitespace inside the #container, which I don't
want. This is why I have to manually specify the #content (max-)width
depending on the viewport width and based on the (fixed) width of its
inline-blocks.
It does seem that the fit-content would be what I need. I guess I
should write an extra rule (after all the media queries), with
#content { max-width: fit-content }, and wait for it to be supported.
Thanks for the pointer.
--
Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta
Received on Monday, 20 August 2012 12:34:43 UTC