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

Re: vertical-align (5.4.4)

From: David Perrell <davidp@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 19:52:52 -0800
Message-Id: <199612170402.UAA08865@serbia.it.earthlink.net>
To: "Jim King" <jimk@mathtype.com>
Cc: "Hakon Lie" <howcome@w3.org>, <www-style@w3.org>, <dsr@w3.org>

Jim King wrote:
> You're assuming here that a replaced item can actually have a
font-size.  Is
> that true? It can't have a line-height currently.

I suppose it can't have a font-size, since font-size implies
line-height. So my example is bogus.

The designers did a admirable job fitting the default HTML treatment of
replaced elements into the CSS model. But, IMO, two changes would make
the spec more versatile without screwing up current behavior:

(1) Allow any measurement for 'vertical-align', not just percentage.

(2) Specify that relative measurements such as 'em' and 'ex' should
refer to the parent's font if the element has no font-size property.

These changes would allow both sizing and vertical alignment of images
relative to the surrounding text.

I see no side effects from these enhancements. Am I missing something?

David Perrell
Received on Monday, 16 December 1996 23:05:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:46 GMT