W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2009

Re: [CSS2.1] Yet another white-space issue with anonymous table objects

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 16:51:54 -0700
Message-Id: <4B1C1E9E-827D-4626-9A28-356EDB745AD0@gmail.com>
To: Michael Jansson <mjan@em2-solutions.com>
Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>

>> <!DOCTYPE html>
>> <html>
>>  <body>
>>    <div style="display: table-cell">A</div>
>>    <div style="position: absolute"></div>
>>    <div style="display: table-cell">B</div>
>>  </body>
>> <html>
>> In this case, the way CSS2.1 is written right now, are the two  
>> table-cell boxes are sibling boxes (since the positioned div is  
>> taken out of flow)?  If not, how is this situation different from  
>> the one with the empty anonymous block above?
> There is no reason for having the absolutely positioned div between  
> the other two divs, so I guess you could argue that there is no  
> reason for supporting such constructs. From an XML point of view,  
> the two cases would be different.

I can imagine a reason: because the HTML source is in proper semantic  
order, but not in ideal order for the design, or there are many  
alternate style sheets for the same general HTML, and you want to move  
the middle block, perhaps even move it off screen, or have it appear  
to the right as a sort of tool tip when you hover over the body.

I think it is a reasonable expection that the two table cells act like  
siblings and that a div stuck between them does not act as a defacto  
"new row" marker. 
Received on Monday, 9 March 2009 23:52:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:25 UTC