- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 13:37:37 -0800
- To: Markus Ernst <derernst@gmx.ch>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Markus Ernst <derernst@gmx.ch> wrote: > I understand that vh is more intuitive to not reserve space for a scroll > bar, at least as long as there is none. This applies for vw, too, but > actually it makes vw pretty useless: > - With overflow:hidden or scroll, it behaves the same as % Incorrect. It behaves the same as % *if all of the element's ancestors, all the way to <html>, are width:100%*. If that's not true, then they're not equivalent. The fact that it's so rarely true is the reason we invented the viewport units. > - With overflow:auto, it is actually not useable, as width=100vw will > trigger a horizontal scrollbar if a vertical one occurs. Correct. So you can set overflow-y:scroll to make 100vw not cause horizontal overflow. > OTOH, vh is really useful and necessary. In my understanding, it would be > intuitive and okay for vh to shrink to the scrollbar, if present (as we know > it from width=100%). We don't know anything of the sort. We can't tell if a horizontal scrollbar will be created until we do the page's full layout. > Unlike for width, this does not seem to have unwanted > effects for height, while the suggested behavior for overflow:auto seems > suboptimal to me, also in the case of vh (it also triggers a vertical > scrollbar if height=100vh and a horizontal scrollbar appears). > > I am inclined to suggest to totally drop vw in favor of an optimal spec for > vh. Oh jeez, I'd super-object to that. ^_^ ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2013 21:38:25 UTC