- From: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:02:38 +0100
- To: www-style@w3.org
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 05:48:33 +0100, Philippe Wittenbergh <ph.wittenbergh@l-c-n.com> wrote: > My point is that, given > html, body { > min-height: 100%; > } > > the min-height on body computes to '0', as the height of the parent > block cannot be resolved. Indeed. I believe this is a spec issue. "If the height of the containing block is not specified explicitly (i.e., it depends on content height), and this element is not absolutely positioned, [...]" First of all, the term "specified explicitly" seems nonsensical. All elements have a specified value. On the other hand, the containing block isn't an element, and isn't necessarily even related to one. So the parentheses actually contain the crucial part here (and readers must figure out for themselves how exactly to determine whether the containing block depends on content height). Now, the main issue: even if assuming the simple case where the containing block corresponds to some particular dimensions of an ancestor block element's sole box, exactly which value does "the height" refer to? - The so-called tentative used height? ("Depends on content height" in the example) - The used value? (Does not "depend on content height" in the example) (- Something else?) -- Øyvind Stenhaug Core Norway, Opera Software ASA
Received on Friday, 27 January 2012 17:03:18 UTC