- From: Masataka Yakura <myakura.web@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2010 15:58:51 +0900
- To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Just came across with this post: <http://translate.google.co.jp/translate?u=http://tomato.myftp.org/blog/readone.php%3Fid%3D105&sl=ja&tl=en> The guy who wrote it wonders if there's a contradiction in CSS 2.1. 1. In "11.1.1 Overflow: the 'overflow' property" there's an example stating "the <blockquote> to be clipped by the containing block." [1] 2. In this case, the containing block is "formed by the content edge of the nearest block-level, table cell or inline-block ancestor box." [2] 3. However, the overflow "specifies whether a box is clipped to its padding edge," not the content edge. [3] That's what the guy basically says. I think that's not a contradiction but I do think the example needs to be more accurate. Saying that the <blockquote> is clipped by the "containing block" would only work for this particular case, where the content edge is the same as the padding edge. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visufx.html#img-overflow1 [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visudet.html#containing-block-details [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visufx.html#overflow-clipping Regards, -- Masataka Yakura <myakura.web@gmail.com>
Received on Monday, 5 July 2010 06:59:45 UTC