- From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 16:36:38 -0500
- To: Paul McKeown (Tiscali) <ppjmckeown@tiscali.co.uk>
- Cc: www-validator-css@w3.org
Hi Paul, On 12-Feb-09, at 7:39 PM, Paul McKeown (Tiscali) wrote: > However, the following CSS 2.1 code fragment, has started generating > a warning, which it never seemed to generate before > The warning is: > In (x)HTML+CSS, floated elements need to have a width declared. Only > elements with an intrinsic width (html, img, input, textarea, > select, or object) are not affected Indeed. It looks like this is a case of fixing an old bug without first checking that it is still relevant. My bad. A few weeks ago I started working on long-standing enhancement request: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=154 I followed the bug report blindly because: * that was what CSS2 said * I had a lot of experience fighting with IE and floats, and hav it hardwired in me that a float without a width is asking for trouble. In retrospect I should probably have made this an error rather than a warning, since it breaks a "must" in the specification. Turns out, as you noticed, that CSS2 is saying "MUST have a width" and CSS21 says "whatever, forget what we said about the width". That makes the warning moot (at least in terms of compliance for CSS21 and more recent). One thing I wonder, however, is whether floated elements without a width still cause significant trouble. I asked around to a few friendly web designers and integrator and the consensus seems to be "for IE, setting a width is always safer". So... should we make this a warning, but lower level (and thus not shown by default, which I'm sure will make everyone allergic to warnings happy ;) )? -- olivier
Received on Friday, 13 February 2009 21:38:43 UTC