Re: Percentages in CommonAbsolutePosition?
- Oorspronkelijk bericht - Van: Vincent Hennebert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Manuel Mall a écrit : My understanding of the spec is that for top and bottom percentages only make sense if the containing block has a fixed height. If the containing block has a variable height percentages are suppose to be ignored and the property value assumed to be auto. I second that, see the CSS2 spec [1]: For 'top' and 'bottom', if the height of the containing block is not specified explicitly (i.e., it depends on content height), the percentage value is interpreted like 'auto'. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-CSS2-19980512/visuren.html#position-props CSS doesn't have the last word here. See the definition for the 'left' property (XSL-FO 1.1 - §7.6.5) all the way at the bottom. In XSL, these are interpreted relative to the prevailing coördinate system. Not to the containing block as in CSS, but to the nearest ancestor reference area. I'd think a similar substitution holds for the definition of a percentage value a bit higher up, so that the offset is a percentage of the /nearest ancestor reference area/'s width Agreed? Cheers, Andreas
Re: Percentages in CommonAbsolutePosition?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip/ CSS doesn't have the last word here. See the definition for the 'left' property (XSL-FO 1.1 - §7.6.5) all the way at the bottom. In XSL, these are interpreted relative to the prevailing coördinate system. Not to the containing block as in CSS, but to the nearest ancestor reference area. I'd think a similar substitution holds for the definition of a percentage value a bit higher up, so that the offset is a percentage of the /nearest ancestor reference area/'s width Agreed? 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, Chris
Re: Percentages in CommonAbsolutePosition?
- 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) 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? Any other (dissenting) thoughts? Cheers, Andreas
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41831] - [PATCH] Refactored configuration, font detection and caching, url resolution
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41831. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41831 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #19713|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-03-20 09:25 --- Created an attachment (id=19756) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19756action=view) Patch file Following feedback from Andreas - thanks v much for taking the time to look at this :-), I have made a very minor modification to the MacFontDirFinder. It should hopefully now be able to detect fonts that have been installed under user home directory (i.e. ~/Library/Fonts). Please try this patch out on your system Andreas. I would encourage, maybe even urge ;-) someone to commit this patch soon as it is a large patch that touches upon a number of files (see file list) and is therefore likely to become out of date quickly with commits to the repository. Kind regards, Adrian. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
