On 20.03.2007 17:18:36 a_l.delmelle wrote:
> >----- 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...
> 
> absolute-position="absolute"
> -> 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 area.
> 
> absolute-position="fixed"
> -> 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)

I agree.

> 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 don't think so. That's only about the positioning of the area, not
about determining the percentages. This just means that the "bpd-cursor"
is not advanced in the normal flow when an absolute or fixed
block-container is encountered.

> Any other (dissenting) thoughts?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Andreas
> 



Jeremias Maerki

Reply via email to