W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2013

Re: Fwd: [css3-multicol] Section 8.1: Overflow inside of multicol elements and positioning

From: Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 13:27:39 -0400
Message-ID: <1874e342e1514ac23057cece76450abb.squirrel@ed-sh-cp3.entirelydigital.com>
To: "Morten Stenshorne" <mstensho@opera.com>
Cc: "Scott Johnson" <sjohnson@mozilla.com>, "www-style\@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>

Le Ven 16 août 2013 16:11, Morten Stenshorne a écrit :
> "Gérard Talbot" <www-style@gtalbot.org> writes:
>
>> Le Ven 16 août 2013 11:30, Scott Johnson a écrit :
>>>

[snipped]

>>

http://people.mozilla.org/~sjohnson/junkyard/b700367/columnbox-clip-abspos.html


>> For situations where the multi-column element is the containing block of
>> an abs. pos. element (say, an image), I am convinced that such abs. pos.
>> img should not be clipped. It should be in front of the rel. pos.
>> multi-column element and its column boxes.
>
> <div style="position:relative; columns:3;">
>   <img style="position:absolute; width:1000%;" src="...">
>
> ?
>
> I think the abspos should be clipped at column boundaries then, since
> the multicol is the containing block. This is similar to how an abspos
> behaves inside a relpos container with non-visible overflow (it gets
> clipped and/or scrolled).

With a non-visible overflow, you are correct: there is clipping or
scrolling. But with overflow: visible, this is not what is observed, at
least with abs. pos. (replaced and/or non-replaced) elements

Anyways... I am confortable with whatever decision is taken with regards
to multi-column element and column boxes in that issue. :)

-----------

[off-topic]

I've checked the §10.3.8 tests

http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/chapter-10.htm#s10.3.8

we have:

http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/absolute-replaced-width-013.htm

http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/absolute-replaced-width-020.htm

http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/absolute-replaced-width-027.htm

http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/nightly-unstable/html4/absolute-replaced-width-034.htm

etc..

and they are all under 100% of the containing block's width.
I think we need now at least one test where the abs. pos. replaced element
width is set to over 100% of the containing block's width.

[/off-topic]

Gérard
-- 
CSS 2.1 Test suite RC6, March 23rd 2011
http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/toc.html

Contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/

Web authors' contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/web-authors-contributions-css21-testsuite.html
Received on Saturday, 17 August 2013 17:28:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:33 UTC