- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 14:31:54 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 10/09/2012 03:05 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 10/9/12 5:39 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote: >> I guess I still find the CSS2.1 language confusing: "the containing >> block is formed by the padding edge of the ancestor." That makes it >> sound like the containing block *is* the imaginary block formed by the >> padding edge of the ancestor. > > Indeed. > > There's an unfortunate tendency to use the term "containing block" to refer interchangeably to "the rectangle defined as the > containing block" (which is not itself a block in any way; it's just a rectangle) and "the element which was used when > defining the containing block" (assuming there was one at all; see initial containing block) and maybe a few other things. > > As defined, right now, the containing block is a rectangle. The other uses are just confused, to a greater or lesser extent. > > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-sizing/#extrinsic-sizing is a great example of this tendency. I can't make heads or tails of > what it's saying. Especially for cases in which the containing block is the ICB. Proposed replacement: | The inner fill-available measure of a box is… | * If the box is the root or is absolutely-positioned, | the used measure of its containing block, else | * max(min-measure|0, min(max-measure|infinity, measure|fill-available)) | where the sizes are inner measures of the element establishing the | box's containing block, and where the first value is used if it is | definite and the second value otherwise. | …less the box's inline-axis margins (after margin collapsing), borders, | and padding. How's that? ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 11 October 2012 21:32:22 UTC