- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 13:27:32 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-box/#overflow says: # The computed values of ‘overflow-x’ and ‘overflow-y’ are the # same as their specified values, except that some combinations # with ‘visible’ are not possible: if one is specified as # ‘visible’ and the other is ‘scroll’ or ‘auto’, then ‘visible’ is # set to ‘auto’. I believe this should say that all combinations with 'visible' and something else are not possible. In other words, the current wording allows 'visible' / 'hidden' combinations, but I think these should not be allowed. For a start, there are a whole bunch of behaviors in CSS that change depending on whether overflow is 'visible' or has one of the other values (in many cases, for good reason, since it doesn't make sense to wrap text around floats that are scrollable relative to the text). It's not clear what should happen in all of these cases when overflow is 'visible hidden' or 'hidden visible'. Also, since we decided to change 'overflow: hidden' so that there's internally a scrollable area and the element is programatically scrollable (a change where Gecko was, prior to the change, the only implementation that matched the spec), I think we should keep the hidden, auto, and scroll values of overflow behaving pretty much the same. I also don't think there are strong use cases for this combination. If there are, I think those use cases should be described and weighed against the costs and additional complexity of adding the feature. -David -- 𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂 𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
Received on Monday, 18 June 2012 20:27:56 UTC