On Jan 8, 2008 10:53 AM wrote: > Bruno Fassino wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >> Hmmm, I always thought that "auto" kind of carried the idea of > >> "shrink-to-fit"? > > > > width:auto has much different meanings, depending on the value of other > > properties. > > So, basically, 'auto' means "make it the full available width, but if > you don't know what width that is, make it as wide as the content".
I don't think that the cases where width:auto means "fit the content" are related to difficulties in knowing what the "available width" in the containing block is (and anyway the 'available' width takes part in the shrink-to-fit computation, whose algorithm is intentionally 'not exactly' defined in the CSS 2.1 specs.) I think they are simply cases where a different behavior has been deemed more useful and natural. For example floats that would take all the available width would defeat their 'floating' behavior, making width:auto on them practically useless. Bruno -- Bruno Fassino http://www.brunildo.org/test ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
