Absolutely positioned div not taking into consideration containing block padding

VERIFIED INVALID

Status

()

P3
normal
VERIFIED INVALID
19 years ago
10 years ago

People

(Reporter: christinehoff4, Assigned: pierre)

Tracking

({css2})

Trunk
Points:
---

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

Attachments

(1 attachment)

(Reporter)

Description

19 years ago
Using the following builds:

Windows: 04-03-09-m15
Mac: 04-03-08-m15
Linux: 04-03-08-m15

Open the attached file. There are two divs. The yellow div has top and left 
padding of 50px. It is relatively positioned. The fuchsia div is absolutely 
positioned within the yellow div (its containing block) with the following 
values: left: 50px; top: 50px

Expected result: the absolutely positioned fuchsia div should display 100px from 
the top side of the yellow div and 100px from the left side of the yellow div 
because it first needs to take into consideration the padding of the containing 
block. 10.1 of the CSS2 specs states:
 
If the element has 'position: absolute', the containing block is established by 
the nearest ancestor with a 'position' other than 'static', in the following 
way: 
    1. In the case that the ancestor is block-level, the containing block is 
formed by the padding edge of the ancestor.
(Reporter)

Comment 1

19 years ago
Created attachment 7192 [details]
testcase to demonstrate problem
(Reporter)

Updated

19 years ago
Keywords: beta2, css2
The padding-edge is the outside edge of the padding (the content edge is the
inside edge).  Therefore the bit of CSS2 that you quote says that the current
behavior is correct.  Marking INVALID.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 19 years ago
Resolution: --- → INVALID

Updated

19 years ago
Keywords: nsbeta2
(Reporter)

Comment 3

18 years ago
Adding 'verifyme' keyword
Keywords: verifyme
Netscape's standard compliance QA team reorganised itself once again, so taking 
remaining non-tables style bugs. Sorry about the spam. I tried to get this done 
directly at the database level, but apparently that is "not easy because of the 
shadow db", "plus it screws up the audit trail", so no can do...
QA Contact: chrisd → ian
VERIFIED
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED

Updated

10 years ago
Keywords: verifyme
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.