W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 1996

Re: vertical-align (5.4.4)

From: David Perrell <davidp@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1996 10:39:31 -0800
Message-Id: <199612131842.KAA25168@norway.it.earthlink.net>
To: "Hakon Lie" <howcome@w3.org>, "Jim King" <jimk@mathtype.com>
Cc: <www-style@w3.org>, <dsr@w3.org>
Jim King wrote:
> what happens with a line that has multiple inline elements (such as
> gifs of equations in one line.)  Would that % be 20% of the overall
> plus the leading, or would it be 20% of the line-height ONLY at the
> where the image is located (which is different from the line-height 2
> characters earlier)?
>  4.4 seems to imply that the line is sectionalized such...

I think you're confusing line box with line-height. Inline elements may
change the height of the line box in which they occur, not their
parent's line-height.

Although a paragraph might have different line-heights as a result of
inline elements, the variations are local to the inline elements. The
parent's line height remains unchanged. So if three successive images
used a percentage for vertical-align, the percentages would all
reference the declared or inherited line-height of the parent element.

> then I need a way to drop each math expression by a set distance
below the
> baseline.

I believe you could accomplish this using a SPAN element with a
line-height set to a pixel measurement and a vertical-align of
'baseline'. You would then nest your IMG within the span, such that the
image is a child of an element with a known line-height.

A vertical-align with absolute length units would be much simpler. Odd
that this property is limited to computed values. (Can anyone comment
as to why this is so?)

David Perrell
Received on Friday, 13 December 1996 14:46:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:42 UTC