my point was not that one.
what i said is this: floats are taken out of the normal flow, inside their parent container, with regards to their sibling elements. when you move the parent, the floats move also. so the parent is acting as if it holds them.
your statement sounded more like saying that a parent with only floats will not contain them or control them: "parent that holds only floats holds nothing". it contains them all right, it just not fully contains them, hence the overflow.
here is what i meant:
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
you may not "see" the parent, but the parent holds the floats: when it moves they move. it just not containing the floats content (which is called overflowing) w/o clearing the floats. that is, it "acts" as if he has no height, not like "it had no content at all". it does act about its content. zero height doesn't mean zero content, in our case means overflowed content. incorrect assertion from your part
and i think my clothing example is actually simple and accurate enough to be understood by anyone