Boris Zbarsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This impression is incorrect. This _is_ how IE/Windows acts, but it is > _NOT_ what the CSS specification says. (And I've never seen Danny > Goodman's name involved in any CSS discussion; I'd love to know who he is.)
Sorry, I stand corrected. That was a quote from _Dynamic HTML_ 1st edition (O'Reilly). I keep my copy of 2nd edition at work and didn't have access to it over the weekend. I have not yet found a discussion in 2E about what happens to a larger object inside a smaller container. > You mean "how does the W3C spec allow a website author to shoot himself > in the foot?" By being a tool (that can be misused) rather than a toy. I still need to understand why the box model dictates that a larger image inside of a smaller div inside of a table cell should be positioned based on the size of the div, but it should overflow out the bottom & right edges of the div until it hits the edge of the cell. And for even more fun... if the dimensions of the image do not match the dimensions of the img tag, Mozilla overflows the image beyond the cell edges as well. I'm pretty sure W3C specs don't say that scaled images should overflow differently than exactly-sized images. -F.
