W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2010

Re: [CSS21] 9.2 Anonymous boxes

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2010 15:15:16 -0700
Message-ID: <4C55F1F4.4080507@inkedblade.net>
To: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 08/01/2010 02:45 PM, Anton Prowse wrote:
> Several issues arise concerning anonymous block boxes.
>
>
> 9.2.1 (Block-level elements and block boxes) says:[1]
>
> # Block-level elements (except for display 'table' elements, which are
> # described in a later chapter) generate a principal block box that
> # contains either only block boxes or only inline boxes.
>
> 9.2.1.1 (Anonymous block boxes) says:[2]
>
> # In a document like this:
> #
> # <DIV>
> # Some text
> # <P>More text
> # </DIV>
> #
> # (and assuming the DIV and the P both have 'display: block'), the DIV
> # appears to have both inline content and block content. To make it
> # easier to define the formatting, we assume that there is an
> # anonymous block box around "Some text".
> #
> # In other words: if a block box (such as that generated for the DIV
> # above) has another block box or run-in box inside it (such as the P
> # above), then we force it to have only block boxes and run-in boxes
> # inside it.
>
> OK. But we also have the following from 16.6.1 (The 'white-space'
> processing model)[3] (which will likely be moved to Ch.9; see [4]):
>
> 16.6.1:
> # Any text that is directly contained inside a block element (not
> # inside an inline element) should be treated as an anonymous inline
> # element.
>
> Issue 1:
>
> Does that mean that there's an anonymous inline box around "Some text"
> or that there's one around "Some text <P>More text" (which would mean
> that the rules for breaking an inline box around a block then come into
> play)? In fact it doesn't matter, since we end up with an anonymous
> block containing an anonymous inline containing "Some text" in both
> interpretations. But what if it were
> "Some text <SPAN>More text</SPAN> End text"? In this case the two
> interpretations – anonymous inline boxes around "Some text" and "End
> text" or one anonymous inline box around everything – yield different
> results.
>
> I think the sentence from 16.6.1 says that it's the first
> interpretation, in each case. I'd be grateful for confirmation of that!

In both cases the first interpretation is correct. I think that's
pretty clear from the text you quoted. The <p> is not text that
is directly contained inside a block, therefore it does not get
wrapped in an anonymous inline. (Its contents, however, are, so
they do get wrapped in an anonymous inline -- a different one.)

BTW, why would the two interpretations yield different results?

> 9.2.1.1:
> # When an inline box contains a block box, the inline box (and its
> # inline ancestors within the same line box) are broken around the
> # block. The line boxes before the break and after the break are
> # enclosed in anonymous boxes, and the block box becomes a sibling of
> # those anonymous boxes. [...]
>
> Issue 2:
>
> s/contains a block box/contains an in-flow block box/
>
> since containing a float doesn't cause the inline content to be split
> between two different blocks.

Assumed editorial. Fixed.

> Issue 3:
>
> What /does/ happen when an inline box contains a float? Does the run of
> inlines+floats in which it sits get wrapped in an anonymous block box
> which becomes the sibling of the floats? If so, this needs stating.

I don't understand. What case exactly are you talking about?

> Issue 4:
>
> Is it the case that, with the exception of an anonymous table box, an
> anonymous block box contains either only block boxes or only inline
> boxes, much like a principal block box? (This is essentially the same
> question I'm asking in [5] as part of the great box cleanup; we'll need
> to ensure we get the same answer!)

Both anonymous block boxes and principal block boxes are block boxes.
So yes, it contains only block*-level* boxes or only inline*-level*
boxes.

> 9.2.1.1:
> # This model would apply in the following example if the following
> # rules:
> #
> # body { display: inline }
> # p { display: block }
> #
> # were used with this HTML document:
> #
> # <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN">
> # <HEAD>
> # <TITLE>Anonymous text interrupted by a block</TITLE>
> # </HEAD>
> # <BODY>
> # This is anonymous text before the P.
> # <P>This is the content of P.</P>
> # This is anonymous text after the P.
> # </BODY>
> #
> # The BODY element contains a chunk (C1) of anonymous text followed by
> # a block-level element followed by another chunk (C2) of anonymous
> # text. The resulting boxes would be an anonymous block box around the
> # BODY, containing an anonymous block box around C1, the P block box,
> # and another anonymous block box around C2.
>
> Issue 5:
>
> Why would there be an anonymous block box around the BODY? Surely the
> principal block box of the (implied[6]) HTML is what surrounds the
> anonymous block box around C1, the principal block box of the P, and the
> anonymous block box around C2.

Good point. Assuming "display: none" for the <head> and "display: block"
for <html>, the example here is wrong.

~fantasai
Received on Sunday, 1 August 2010 22:15:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:30 GMT