- From: SelenIT via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2017 04:16:10 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> We'd just need a third name to mean "ordinary inline element, or a 'loose' block element". > Maybe that can be flow? Agree! It also is currently defined almost that way, so little change will be needed). By the way, if we re-introduce the `block` value as the inner display type and thus fix the issue with `inline-block` blockification, do we _really_ still need the 2x3 matrix? Wouldn't the following be sufficient? Short/legacy value | Full value | Result ------------------ | ---------- | ------ inline | inline flow | Ordinary inline box that the parent formatting context "flows" into inline-block | inline block | Ordinary inline block block | block flow | Ordinary block box that the parent formatting context "flows" into flow-root | block block | Block box with the new BFC The `inline-block` value would be in line:) with other inline-* properties. Other values could be unchanged. The `flow-root` value could stay a bit "special" because its primary use case is rather special, and it won't conflict with the existing `inline-block` behavior (although renaming it to `block-root` could be more intuitive). -- GitHub Notification of comment by SelenIT Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1496#issuecomment-307540981 using your GitHub account
Received on Saturday, 10 June 2017 04:16:19 UTC