- From: Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
- Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 13:06:59 -0700
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CANMdWTtMjsXFDeZ+4TTUPLRLmdD7qo907mnjdCEEoZUYwgX0fg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 2:31 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>wrote: > 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<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? Just to make sure I understand this, what happens in the following case: <div style="position: relative; padding: 100px"> <div style="position:absolute; height: fill-available"></div> </div> The way I read the spec, the absolutely positioned div should be 200px tall, yes?
Received on Friday, 19 October 2012 20:07:49 UTC