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