Why does width apply to a button with display inline? - html

According to MDN, a button is an inline element.
However, button elements have default styling with display: inline-block (See this question)
button, textarea,
input, select { display: inline-block }
So far so good.
However:
If I now set the button with display:inline - width still applies!!
DEMO
button,
div {
width: 200px;
border: 1px solid red;
display: inline;
}
<button>button</button>
<div>div</div>
Now, according to the spec: width does not apply to inline elements (which are non-replaced)
Applies to: all elements but non-replaced inline elements, table rows,
and row groups
That being the case:
Why does width still apply to an inline button element?

As mentioned in the comments, I'm pretty sure this has to do with browser-specific rendering behavior as is so typical of form elements. What I believe is happening when you set display: inline on the button is... nothing. Effectively, it's the same as the typical browser default display: inline-block, on which the width property does apply.
Refer to section 10.2, which describes the width property itself. In particular it explains why exactly the width property does not apply to inline elements (or inline boxes):
This property does not apply to non-replaced inline elements. The content width of a non-replaced inline element's boxes is that of the rendered content within them (before any relative offset of children). Recall that inline boxes flow into line boxes. The width of line boxes is given by the their containing block, but may be shorted by the presence of floats.
In short, it's because the content of inline elements resides in line boxes. The width of a line box cannot be controlled directly; it is determined entirely by the containing block and any incidental floats. You can see an example of line box rendering in section 9.4.2, which describes inline formatting contexts.
If display: inline actually made a button render as an inline box, all its contents would spill over and it would no longer look, or function, like a button. It makes sense to want to prevent that from happening, and I think that's just what browsers do.
So what exactly do they do to prevent this? Is a button a replaced element? I can't say for sure. But note, in section 9.2.2, it says:
Inline-level boxes that are not inline boxes (such as replaced inline-level elements, inline-block elements, and inline-table elements) are called atomic inline-level boxes because they participate in their inline formatting context as a single opaque box.
Section 10 does not explicitly mention atomic inline-level boxes, but it does have sections for calculating dimensions for inline replaced elements, as well as inline-block elements whether replaced or non-replaced, all of which are considered atomic inlines as mentioned above. In all of these cases, the width property applies as normal if it's not auto.
So, while it's still debatable whether or not a button is a replaced element, it probably doesn't matter at all for the purposes of this question. But it is still some kind of atomic inline element, since it still participates in an inline formatting context. For what it's worth, though, it appears to shrink to fit its contents if you don't set a width, so its behavior is probably closer to that of an inline-block in that case. One could say then that the actual value of display becomes inline-block, although this is never reflected in the developer tools because the computed value does not change (again a side effect of browser-specific rendering behavior).

Since like Boltclock, I don't think that there's a simple answer to this, this is as much a dump of my thoughts on the subject as an answer, but I hope it will be informative.
Although the CSS display property is superficially quite simple, it actually contains a multitude of aspects. The CSS level 3 draft spec css-display captures some of this complexity, but still doesn't seem to cover it adequately.
The HTML5 spec says for the rendering of <button> elements:
When the button binding applies to a button element, the element is
expected to render as an 'inline-block' box rendered as a button whose
contents are the contents of the element.
An inline-block box has a number of aspects to it:
1. An inline-level element
This means that it participates in a inline formatting context within a line box. It flows in sequence with other elements that are on the same line. The line box's content can be centre aligned with text-align:center property on its container, and the line box is shortened by avoiding floated elements.
2. Applies a width property and the auto value is shrink-to-fit
Unlike non-replaced display:inline elements, the width value applies. But also, if a width value is not specified, a shrink-to-fit algorithm is applied to determine the width. This is like floated elements, or display:table elements, but different from display:block elements which are as wide as possible if no width is specified. It's also unlike replaced inline elements and replaced inline-block elements which, if no width is specified, use their intrinsic width if they have one and a default value of 300px if they don't. Shrink-to-fit is a meaningless concept for replaced elements.
3. A block-container element
Block container elements are make up of a stack of line boxes. The content flows from one line box to the next and the height of the inline-block elements grows (subject to overflow) to fully contain all the line boxes.
4. The baseline is the baseline of the last contained line box
When the inline-block element contains multiple lines, its baseline is the last of those lines. This is unlike floats or display:table-cell elements which are also shrink-to-fit, block container elements. Floats are outside normal flow so they do not have a baseline, which display:table-cell elements have a baseline that is the baseline of their first line box. A button that has multiple lines does vertically align according this last line box rule.
Now, this is fine for the default display setting. and the HTML5 rendering requirement means that the used value of display for buttons is inline-block even when the specified value is inline. But it doesn't account for the behaviour when specified value is block. In this case, the element has a line-break before and after it, and margin:auto centres the box as a display:block element would, and is not what would be expected of inline-block.
However, its width for a specified value of auto is shrink-to-fit like inline-block, whereas the expected behaviour for display:block is as-wide-as-possible. As far as I know, the only display value that behaves like that is display:table, but there is nothing else to suggest that display:table is being used.
So there's nothing in the spec that I can find which matches this precisely. We can only hope that when the css-display spec gets completed, that it will cover this behaviour.

There are 2 types of element.
Non-replaced elements
Replaced elements
Button belongs to replaced element category.
You can find more on below link.
Littlewebhut
SitePoint
So, for button, according to spec, it becomes right.
Inline, non-replaced elements
The width property does not apply. A computed value of auto for margin-left or margin-right becomes a used value of 0.
Inline, replaced elements (This section applies to button)
A computed value of auto for margin-left or margin-right becomes a used value of 0.
If height and width both have computed values of auto and the element also has an intrinsic width, then that intrinsic width is the used value of width.
If height and width both have computed values of auto and the element has no intrinsic width, but does have an intrinsic height and intrinsic ratio; or if width has a computed value of auto, height has some other computed value, and the element does have an intrinsic ratio; then the used value of width is:
(used height) * (intrinsic ratio)
If height and width both have computed values of auto and the element has an intrinsic ratio but no intrinsic height or width, then the used value of width is undefined in CSS 2.1. However, it is suggested that, if the containing block's width does not itself depend on the replaced element's width, then the used value of width is calculated from the constraint equation used for block-level, non-replaced elements in normal flow.
If width has a computed value of auto, and the element has an intrinsic width, then that intrinsic width is the used value of width.
If width has a computed value of width, but none of the conditions above are met, then the used value of width becomes 300px.But, if 300px is too wide to fit the device, UAs should use the width of the largest rectangle that has a 2:1 ratio and fits the device instead.

Related

Why does margin-top and margin-bottom work for input? [duplicate]

According to MDN, a button is an inline element.
However, button elements have default styling with display: inline-block (See this question)
button, textarea,
input, select { display: inline-block }
So far so good.
However:
If I now set the button with display:inline - width still applies!!
DEMO
button,
div {
width: 200px;
border: 1px solid red;
display: inline;
}
<button>button</button>
<div>div</div>
Now, according to the spec: width does not apply to inline elements (which are non-replaced)
Applies to: all elements but non-replaced inline elements, table rows,
and row groups
That being the case:
Why does width still apply to an inline button element?
As mentioned in the comments, I'm pretty sure this has to do with browser-specific rendering behavior as is so typical of form elements. What I believe is happening when you set display: inline on the button is... nothing. Effectively, it's the same as the typical browser default display: inline-block, on which the width property does apply.
Refer to section 10.2, which describes the width property itself. In particular it explains why exactly the width property does not apply to inline elements (or inline boxes):
This property does not apply to non-replaced inline elements. The content width of a non-replaced inline element's boxes is that of the rendered content within them (before any relative offset of children). Recall that inline boxes flow into line boxes. The width of line boxes is given by the their containing block, but may be shorted by the presence of floats.
In short, it's because the content of inline elements resides in line boxes. The width of a line box cannot be controlled directly; it is determined entirely by the containing block and any incidental floats. You can see an example of line box rendering in section 9.4.2, which describes inline formatting contexts.
If display: inline actually made a button render as an inline box, all its contents would spill over and it would no longer look, or function, like a button. It makes sense to want to prevent that from happening, and I think that's just what browsers do.
So what exactly do they do to prevent this? Is a button a replaced element? I can't say for sure. But note, in section 9.2.2, it says:
Inline-level boxes that are not inline boxes (such as replaced inline-level elements, inline-block elements, and inline-table elements) are called atomic inline-level boxes because they participate in their inline formatting context as a single opaque box.
Section 10 does not explicitly mention atomic inline-level boxes, but it does have sections for calculating dimensions for inline replaced elements, as well as inline-block elements whether replaced or non-replaced, all of which are considered atomic inlines as mentioned above. In all of these cases, the width property applies as normal if it's not auto.
So, while it's still debatable whether or not a button is a replaced element, it probably doesn't matter at all for the purposes of this question. But it is still some kind of atomic inline element, since it still participates in an inline formatting context. For what it's worth, though, it appears to shrink to fit its contents if you don't set a width, so its behavior is probably closer to that of an inline-block in that case. One could say then that the actual value of display becomes inline-block, although this is never reflected in the developer tools because the computed value does not change (again a side effect of browser-specific rendering behavior).
Since like Boltclock, I don't think that there's a simple answer to this, this is as much a dump of my thoughts on the subject as an answer, but I hope it will be informative.
Although the CSS display property is superficially quite simple, it actually contains a multitude of aspects. The CSS level 3 draft spec css-display captures some of this complexity, but still doesn't seem to cover it adequately.
The HTML5 spec says for the rendering of <button> elements:
When the button binding applies to a button element, the element is
expected to render as an 'inline-block' box rendered as a button whose
contents are the contents of the element.
An inline-block box has a number of aspects to it:
1. An inline-level element
This means that it participates in a inline formatting context within a line box. It flows in sequence with other elements that are on the same line. The line box's content can be centre aligned with text-align:center property on its container, and the line box is shortened by avoiding floated elements.
2. Applies a width property and the auto value is shrink-to-fit
Unlike non-replaced display:inline elements, the width value applies. But also, if a width value is not specified, a shrink-to-fit algorithm is applied to determine the width. This is like floated elements, or display:table elements, but different from display:block elements which are as wide as possible if no width is specified. It's also unlike replaced inline elements and replaced inline-block elements which, if no width is specified, use their intrinsic width if they have one and a default value of 300px if they don't. Shrink-to-fit is a meaningless concept for replaced elements.
3. A block-container element
Block container elements are make up of a stack of line boxes. The content flows from one line box to the next and the height of the inline-block elements grows (subject to overflow) to fully contain all the line boxes.
4. The baseline is the baseline of the last contained line box
When the inline-block element contains multiple lines, its baseline is the last of those lines. This is unlike floats or display:table-cell elements which are also shrink-to-fit, block container elements. Floats are outside normal flow so they do not have a baseline, which display:table-cell elements have a baseline that is the baseline of their first line box. A button that has multiple lines does vertically align according this last line box rule.
Now, this is fine for the default display setting. and the HTML5 rendering requirement means that the used value of display for buttons is inline-block even when the specified value is inline. But it doesn't account for the behaviour when specified value is block. In this case, the element has a line-break before and after it, and margin:auto centres the box as a display:block element would, and is not what would be expected of inline-block.
However, its width for a specified value of auto is shrink-to-fit like inline-block, whereas the expected behaviour for display:block is as-wide-as-possible. As far as I know, the only display value that behaves like that is display:table, but there is nothing else to suggest that display:table is being used.
So there's nothing in the spec that I can find which matches this precisely. We can only hope that when the css-display spec gets completed, that it will cover this behaviour.
There are 2 types of element.
Non-replaced elements
Replaced elements
Button belongs to replaced element category.
You can find more on below link.
Littlewebhut
SitePoint
So, for button, according to spec, it becomes right.
Inline, non-replaced elements
The width property does not apply. A computed value of auto for margin-left or margin-right becomes a used value of 0.
Inline, replaced elements (This section applies to button)
A computed value of auto for margin-left or margin-right becomes a used value of 0.
If height and width both have computed values of auto and the element also has an intrinsic width, then that intrinsic width is the used value of width.
If height and width both have computed values of auto and the element has no intrinsic width, but does have an intrinsic height and intrinsic ratio; or if width has a computed value of auto, height has some other computed value, and the element does have an intrinsic ratio; then the used value of width is:
(used height) * (intrinsic ratio)
If height and width both have computed values of auto and the element has an intrinsic ratio but no intrinsic height or width, then the used value of width is undefined in CSS 2.1. However, it is suggested that, if the containing block's width does not itself depend on the replaced element's width, then the used value of width is calculated from the constraint equation used for block-level, non-replaced elements in normal flow.
If width has a computed value of auto, and the element has an intrinsic width, then that intrinsic width is the used value of width.
If width has a computed value of width, but none of the conditions above are met, then the used value of width becomes 300px.But, if 300px is too wide to fit the device, UAs should use the width of the largest rectangle that has a 2:1 ratio and fits the device instead.

How height: auto works in HTML and CSS?

In CSS and HTML how does height: auto work? What do browsers consider while calculating height of the element, for which height is set to auto?
You can split two cases:
div and other containers: the height is the one the browser will use if you don't specify anything, trying to contain the element contents. (read Mathijs's answer for more details)
images and other block elements with intrinsic dimensions (width and height): if you specify the width, then "height: auto" will scale proportionally.
So, in other words, is useless unless you need to reset the browser behaviour or keep proportions to some objects.
Here's an excerpt on this copied from the W3C CSS2 spec
If it only has inline-level children, the height is the distance
between the top of the topmost line box and the bottom of the
bottommost line box.
If it has block-level children, the height is the distance between the
top margin-edge of the topmost block-level child box and the bottom
margin-edge of the bottommost block-level child box.
Absolutely positioned children are ignored, and relatively positioned
boxes are considered without their offset. Note that the child box may
be an anonymous block box.
In addition, if the element has any floating descendants whose bottom
margin edge is below the element's bottom content edge, then the
height is increased to include those edges. Only floats that
participate in this block formatting context are taken into account,
e.g., floats inside absolutely positioned descendants or other floats
are not.

Why doesn't the shrink to fit behavior of overflow: hidden work on input elements?

The answer to this question is "wrap the input in a span, and apply overflow: hidden to the span."
This works because it establishes a new block formatting context for the span, making room for the floats.
Why does applying overflow: hidden directly to the input not work? Why is it necessary to wrap the input in a span?
The behavior of block formatting contexts next to floats is not fully specified. From CSS2.1 (emphasis added):
The border box of a table, a block-level replaced element, or an element in the normal flow that establishes a new block formatting context (such as an element with 'overflow' other than 'visible') must not overlap the margin box of any floats in the same block formatting context as the element itself. If necessary, implementations should clear the said element by placing it below any preceding floats, but may place it adjacent to such floats if there is sufficient space. They may even make the border box of said element narrower than defined by section 10.3.3. CSS2 does not define when a UA may put said element next to the float or by how much said element may become narrower.
So the (unsatisfying) answer is effectively "that's just how browsers behave". This means that layouts that rely on the "shrink to fit" behavior -- the effect produced by wrapping the input in a span, in the question's example -- are relying on unspecified browser behavior. From the point of view of the spec, browsers could just as well always clear the block formatting context below the float.
It appears there's been some activity to better specify this corner of CSS for CSS3, but I haven't found anything authoritative.
Overflow: hidden applies to the container element, instructing the browser how to manage content that extends beyond the defined limits of the container's borders. By adding overflow: hidden directly to the input you're not really adding anything since the input doesn't have any child elements to affect the positioning or proportions.
Setting overflow doesn't clear the float at the element, it self-clears. This means that the element with overflow applied (auto or hidden), will extend as large as it needs to encompass child elements inside that are floated (instead of collapsing), assuming that the height isn't declared.

Why does display:inline cancel height?

I was making a menu with id menu which had the following set:
display: inline;
height: 200px;
Once I removed display: inline;, height worked again.
Why?
display: inline;
Are usually used to refer to text elements;
From the w3c page:
[inline] Causes an element to generate one or more inline boxes.
Therefore, the height you must set is the line-height property. From the w3c page:
On a block container element whose content is composed of inline-level elements, 'line-height' specifies the minimal height of line boxes within the element.
Notice here that you can control only the minimal height of your inline elements
Because the spec says so:
'height' … Applies to: all elements but non-replaced inline elements, table columns, and column groups
line-height, however, does apply to inline elements.
By making something display inline you are effectively making it the same as a span. As such the only valid height value is line-height since you are working on an inline element.
To render height values you would need to use a div tag or force your existing tab to render like a div / object which accepts height attributes. You can do this by setting display:block.
In essence you can render a div to work like a span by setting display:inline, and conversely render a span as effectively a div via display:block.
Span tag are meant for inline styling such as font size, colour, decoration, etc.

Why does changing font-size and line-height screw up my HTML layout?

I could post the code if it would be helpful (but it's a lot). Basically, if I change line-height or font-size to a really big value, it breaks my html layout - specifically, my DIVs seem to be getting bigger...But I don't have text in those divs.
Any inline element will pay attention to line-height:
On a block container element whose content is composed of inline-level elements, 'line-height' specifies the minimal height of line boxes within the element.
In your case, you have <img> elements (which are inline elements by default) inside your <div> elements (which are block containers).
Changing the font-size implicitly alters the pixel value of line-height, the default is line-height: normal and that means:
Tells user agents to set the used value to a "reasonable" value based on the font of the element.
So, altering either the font-size or line-height will change the vertical space that your inline elements occupy.