Re: inline-block baseline when the baseline would be outside of the element

"L. David Baron" <> writes:

> On Thursday 2013-07-11 18:38 +0200, Morten Stenshorne wrote:
>> Doh, right, so that wasn't 100% helpful after all. :) I guess what's
>> interesting is what goes on in the block progression direction,
>> overflow-wise. Whatever happens to inline overflow probably isn't
>> interesting at all, right?
>> Then again, there's also a different defintion of overflow-x and
>> overflow-y in a different spec - here:
>> This one is closer to what the browsers actually have implemented (if we
>> ignore prefixed 'paged-*' values in Webkit and Presto), and here the
>> computed values are required to agree on being either visible or
>> non-visible. With this spec it's straight-forward to do what the last
>> paragraph in chapter 10 of the CSS 2.1 spec says.
> The css3-box draft actually allows one of the values to be 'hidden'
> and the other to be 'visible'.  I've never agreed to that (and I've
> objected to it at least once), and I don't think it represents WG
> consensus, though.

Right, it says:

    The computed values of ‘overflow-x’ and ‘overflow-y’ are the same as
    their specified values, except that some combinations with ‘visible’
    are not possible: if one is specified as ‘visible’ and the other is
    ‘scroll’ or ‘auto’, then ‘visible’ is set to ‘auto’.

So 'visible' cannot be combined with 'auto' or 'scroll', but it can be
combined with 'hidden'? I didn't read it that way, but I was reading too
fast again (or brain-damaged from the Presto implementation, which
doesn't allow 'visible' to be combined with anything else - I wonder
where we got that from, then).

How does combining visible and hidden make sense, when we know that
overflow:hidden is still scrollable via scripts?

> The css-overflow draft doesn't allow that combination.  And the
> interaction rules in css-overflow involving the new values are in
> "very early draft" stage, and haven't really been reviewed at all.

Yes, much better (and it's how I sort of assumed that everone had
implemented it anyway, for some reason).

I'd love to get the new values properly specced somehow, BTW.

---- Morten Stenshorne, developer, Opera Software ASA ----
---- Office: +47 23692400 ------ Mobile: +47 93440112 ----
------------------ -----------------

Received on Thursday, 11 July 2013 19:08:01 UTC