- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 14:03:50 -0700
- To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
- Cc: Jonathan Kingston <jonathan@jooped.com>, Patrick Dark <www-style.at.w3.org@patrick.dark.name>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote: >> On 22 Jun 2015, at 22:10, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote: >>>> On 22 Jun 2015, at 21:40, Jonathan Kingston <jonathan@jooped.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> However could I ask if there was a reason margin-box was never considered? >>> >>> It was considered. I've been through the archives of the www-style recently, and there were about 2 or 3 discussions during the last 15 years on this topic. >>> >>> The conclusion was that it was possible, but that there was not enough demand / not enough use cases to >>> justify specifying, writing tests, implementing, etc... >> >> Importantly, margin-collapsing makes it very unclear exactly what the >> bounds of your margin box are. Solving this is tricky, and unlikely >> to always (or even often) be what is wanted. > > I don't think that's true. It might be somewhat counter-intuitive, but there's no particular difficulty in defining what it would do. > > See Hixie debunking this point 16 years ago: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/1999Nov/0037.html That's *an* answer, yes. It's not clear that it's the best answer, just that it's probably the simplest. ~TJ
Received on Monday, 22 June 2015 21:04:38 UTC