RE: [CSS2.1] Interop Issue in regards to fixed/absolute positioned children inside of inline-relative containers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boris Zbarsky [mailto:bzbarsky@MIT.EDU]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 12:12 PM
> To: www-style@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [CSS2.1] Interop Issue in regards to fixed/absolute positioned
> children inside of inline-relative containers
> 
> On 7/14/14, 7:18 PM, Greg Whitworth wrote:
> > We have found an interop issue on how an inline-relative's offset
> > should affect a fixed/absolute element.
> 
> To be clear, this is about the case when the absolute/fixed element has auto
> offsets so what matter is the "static position" of CSS 2.1 section 10.3.7, right?
> 
> > Absolute Example: http://jsfiddle.net/eUV76/1/embedded/result/
> 
> Let's focus on this one, since I agree that absolute and fixed position should
> be treated identically here.
> 
> In particular, let's focus on the "relative with offset:" case.
> 
> For the case it's interesting to look at what actually happens if the positions
> are set to static: http://fiddle.jshell.net/eUV76/4/show/
> 
> I agree that it looks odd that Firefox is not vertically moving the green bit and
> not moving the blue bit at all.  That said, the vertical position of the green bit
> looks odd to me in IE as well, given where the static position is.
> 
> The spec, of course says:
> 
>    But rather than actually calculating the dimensions of that
>    hypothetical box, user agents are free to make a guess at its
>    probable position.
> 
> -Boris

The Y positioning of the absolute positioned inline element is consistent among all implementations as seen in "Relative with no offset." I believe this is correct since setting it to absolute is pulling it out of the flow but keeping it in the same position by default. The only thing we don't all agree on in this case is whether the child should be brought along using the same positioning with its parent's offset. Chrome and IE do keep the position of the children the same while moving the parent containing block and that seems to me to be the most consistent when compared with "Relative with no offset" example.

Greg

Received on Tuesday, 15 July 2014 21:29:15 UTC