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

Re: [CSS21] Issues with inline formatting model (particularly 10.8)

From: Peter Moulder <peter.moulder@monash.edu>
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2010 09:43:35 +1000
To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net
Cc: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
Message-id: <20100803234335.GA15183@bowman.infotech.monash.edu.au>
(Bert, I've cc'd you as an editor just for process' sake for the last
 paragraph of this message.)

On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 08:28:16PM +0200, Anton Prowse wrote:
> Peter Moulder wrote:

> >The fix would be to talk about boxes instead of elements, and [...]
> [...] you're right in your
> observation that this section is yet another place where "elements"
> should be "boxes" most of the time.
> I know fantasai's got the element vs box issue in her sights ;-).  We
> need to complete the great box cleanup (Issue #120; [5]) first
> though, in order to have the vocabulary necessary to reformulate all
> these sections in terms of boxes.

Thanks for pointing that out.  I've been wondering for the last twelve hours
what I've missed that fantasai should write

  Table-caption elements are explicitly defined to be block-level elements
  in 17.4,  so this is already unambiguous.

when I don't see any such explicit statement.

I apologize for having tried to make review comments that the
specification isn't ready for yet.

Would it be fair to say that it would be best for me not to make
any further review comments on the specification until these
basic issues are sorted out?  It seems that the specification
isn't yet ready for comments such as mine that address precision
in the specification when what's needed for now is the experience
of the existing implementors to decide what the behaviour should be
before turning attention to how to convey that behaviour to future

I'm happy to share my implementation experience, but it looks as if
it's more useful for me to keep quiet until these basic issues are
worked out.

If this is to be my last message to www-style for a while, then
I'll note here just for the sake of process and archived statements
that the current text of the CSS2.1 specification is not implementable,
that there are various issues with inline formatting model, box heights,
table layout, counter generation, rendering etc. that mean I cannot
reproduce other browsers' behaviour just by following the text of the
CSS2.1 specification.  I know you're all working on fixing these and that
doing so takes time.

Received on Tuesday, 3 August 2010 23:44:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:37 UTC