- From: Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
- Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 15:30:42 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CANMdWTsUs8cY5A=6tzVxqV33VmE6sv1vdz-huHRHLezF6Kt+UQ@mail.gmail.com>
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visudet.html#containing-block-details "If the element has 'position: absolute', the containing block is established by the nearest ancestor with a 'position' of 'absolute', 'relative' or 'fixed', in the following way: In the case that the ancestor is an inline element, the containing block is the bounding box around the padding boxes of the first and the last inline boxes generated for that element. In CSS 2.1, if the inline element is split across multiple lines, the containing block is undefined. Otherwise, the containing block is formed by the padding edge of the ancestor." http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-sizing/#extrinsic-sizing "less the box's inline-axis margins, borders, and padding." Should the extrinsic size of position:absolute elements include the padding or not? My feeling is that it shouldn't for the purposes of things like fill-available and auto-sizing perpendicular writing-modes, but I could be convinced otherwise. Not that we can change it now, but it's not clear to me why CSS2 chose the padding box in the first place. What's the use-case this addresses?
Received on Friday, 7 September 2012 22:31:31 UTC