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

Re: Issue 138 proposed text

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 17:44:31 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTimWo7xEMechSH2_YfRcbAo5QukEjkGGiEZ1vsaF@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> On 7/16/10 2:49 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>>
>>> Would it be better to say simply that the relative positioning "also
>>> affects the block box contained by the inline" instead of "also
>>> affects the block box"?
>>
>> That might be sufficient.  Boris, does that sound like it resolves
>> anything?  Or would you prefer a bit more of a rewrite that makes it
>> more explicit?
>
> That sounds fine, as long as the test suite contains tests that would fail
> on any incorrect interpretations.

In that case, then, my proposal is amended thusly:

Currently, section 9.2.1.1 of CSS2.1 has this paragraph:

"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. When such an inline box is affected by relative
positioning, the relative positioning also affects the block box."

I suggest changing it to read:

"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. When such an inline box is affected by relative
positioning, the relative positioning also affects the block box
contained in the block box."

(The only change is an addition of 5 words at the very end.)

~TJ
Received on Saturday, 17 July 2010 00:45:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:29 GMT