----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
Van: Chris Bowditch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<snip />

AFAICT, I don't think you've got everything nailed down here. As Vincent already mentioned the ancestor reference area could change depending on the value of abolute-position property. So can you clarify exactly how you intend to resolve the % for top and left for all values of absolute-position property of BC? Thanks,

Hmm, I don't completely agree with Vincent's assessment...

Have you actually checked the code to see the difference in handling between absolute-position="absolute" and absolute-position="fixed"?

When I was having trouble placing a BC in the past, Jeremias told me that I needed to use absolute-position="fixed" instead of absolute-position="absolute" to place it relatively to the top left of the page. From the fact JM wrote the BC Layout code I deduce this is JM's assessment as well as Vincent's assessment. But I guess he can speak for himself ;)

In the meantime, the current behaviour can be deduced from the code.

-> The area's position (and possibly size) is specified with the "left", "right", "top", 
and "bottom" properties. These properties specify offsets with respect to the area's nearest ancestor reference 

-> The area's position is calculated according to the "absolute" model...

Whatever follows in that second definition is irrelevant wrt determining the 
base for percentage values to compute the initial offset (or IOW: determining 
which is the nearest ancestor reference area)

Leaves my original question:
What I'm still not sure about is: "Absolutely positioned areas are taken out of the normal flow." Does that mean that percentages on any block-container with position="absolute" should always be based on the containing page?

I think so, but like yourself I'm not 100% certain. I think it would certainly meet user expectations.



Reply via email to