Re: [css3-box] padding: auto

Maybe stating the obvious here, but here's my naive take on the main
issues that need resolving, assuming the latest ED intended to truly
define a padding:auto (I agree with Lea that this is a useful property
value to define):

1. How does padding:auto respond to over constrained boxes?
2. How does padding:auto interact with margin:auto?

Mike Sherov
Lead Programmer
SNAP Interactive, Inc.
Ticker: STVI.OB

Sent Via Mobile: Please excuse my grammar, tone, and punctuation. My
thumbs can't create flowery prose.

On Jul 17, 2012, at 3:02 PM, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote:

> ± From: Lea Verou [mailto:leaverou@gmail.com]
> ± Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 4:08 PM
> ±
> ± Basically, what's needed is an `auto` value for padding, that makes it
> ± behave as `auto` does for margin. In the latest ED there *is* a new
> ± `auto` value allowed for the padding properties [1], but the way it's
> ± supposed to work is not explained anywhere.
> ±
> ± [1]: http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-box/#the-padding-properties
>
> Auto padding may create a new problem of what happens if there is no extra space and padding is shrinking to zero, which is rarely an acceptable value for padding.
>
> I looked at all your links (good collection btw) and all but one (Perch) have extra padding that wouldn't be there if they just had "padding:auto".
>
> It seems that if "padding:auto" is added, we'll also need 'min-padding'. Which may be reasonable.
>
> Or... if generated content is extended to make it possible to add a wrapper to any element, that would make the same result possible:
>
>    body::around {
>        margin:0;
>        background:url(bg.jpg);
>        min-height: 100vh;
>    }
>    body {
>        margin:10 auto;
>        max-width: 40em;
>        ...
>    }
>
> I believe this kind of generated content has been discussed, but I can't point to any discussion or proposal.....
>
> Alex
>
>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2012 01:43:18 UTC