W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2000

Re: Inline h*ll

From: Matthew Brealey <thelawnet@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 08:01:53 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <20000113160153.24822.qmail@web903.mail.yahoo.com>
To: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
--- Ian Hickson <py8ieh@bath.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2000, Matthew Brealey wrote:
> > I would appreciate if someone can explain how (for example) the
> > border is where it is.
> The border of an inline element is drawn around the padding edge of
> the inline box. The padding is "drawn" around the font-size of the
> element. It is important to note that the font-size, background,
> padding, border and margins of inline elements are independent of the
> line-height (except that line-height can be dependent on the font-size
> if it is specified as a percentage, a ratio, or in "em" units).

Yes I know - that wasn't the border to which I was referring.

The only border involved was on a block element - P.bigholder {margin: 0;
padding: 0;
font: 16px/18px sans-serif;
border-bottom: solid 1px green;
color: blue}
SPAN.big {font-size: 160px}

I apologise if I didn't make this clear - the border was not used to check
the border implementation, but rather to test the height of the P.

I've just realised what the problem is. I see what you mean - the
difference is in our respective interpretations of <br>. We were both
working on the same basis - the only difference is with <br>, but I was
going on the basis of:

<blockquote cite="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS1#br-elements">
4.6    'BR' elements

The current CSS1 properties and values cannot describe the behavior of the
'BR' element. In HTML, the 'BR' element specifies a line break between
words. In effect, the element is replaced by a line break. Future versions
of CSS may handle added and replaced content, but CSS1-based formatters
must treat 'BR' specially. 

On the basis that CSS 2 doesn't say anything about BR, I was working on
the basis that it wasn't considered for the purpose of line height
calculations and in particular that:

<line 1>
Some text that reaches a natural break due to it reaching the block edge
</line 1>
<line 2>
And some more text on the next line
</line 2>

In particular, if this had occurred in the case in point; i.e., the break
was natural rather than forced, the height of the element most certainly
would be 54 px.

<line 1>
Some text that reaches an unnatural end.<br>
</line 1>
<line 2>
And some more text on the next line
</line 2>

Now it seems to be your (and others) belief that the difference is
significant, but in my view it is confusing and unnatural to treat the
<br> as anything other than in the same way as a line break caused through
natural means. I do not see what useful function treating <br> as empty
inline rather than as 'special' serves (particularly in view of the
citation above).

From Matthew Brealey (http://members.tripod.co.uk/lawnet (for law)or http://members.tripod.co.uk/lawnet/WEBFRAME.HTM (for CSS))
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
Received on Thursday, 13 January 2000 11:05:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:52 UTC