W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: [css3-transforms] atomic inline-element?

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 12:46:00 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDD1Q4bSS238rUaDOqxOq7m=p_cz9ApzrZzh4nRVnKffcA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Dr. Olaf Hoffmann" <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
Cc: public-fx@w3.org
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de> wrote:
> √ėyvind Stenhaug:
> Related to (X)HTML:
> Is <br /> atomic, because it is in general an empty element without
> attributes? (But it can have attributes, is it sufficient, if the author
> does not provide any?)
> <span></span> because it is empty without attributes?
>
> The follwoing has obviously a substructure like attribute and content,
> therefore not atomic, because it can be reduced to a substructure?
> <span title="ex">ample</span>
>
> This one?
> <span title="sample"><em>ex</em>ample</span>
>
> And atomic inline-element - is the 'inline' related to the
> CSS-decoration of the element or to some intrinsic knowledge
> of the meaning of the element, resulting from the definition
> of the element, here in (X)HTML?

The definition in CSS2.1 is pretty clear on this.  Those terms are
defined solely in terms of CSS properties, and have no co

The definitions of 'atomic inline' and 'inline' in general are solely
in terms of CSS stuff.  You are an inline element if your 'display' is
'inline', 'inline-block', or 'inline-table' (or one of the other
inline-level variants, like 'inline-flexbox'.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 9 March 2012 20:46:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 9 March 2012 20:46:49 GMT