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

Re: Issue 158 proposed text

From: Bruno Fassino <fassino@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:29:44 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTikDt7Mba-Nme1VtijK9qIr1tiVlpCxlNmfgnib3@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:44 AM, Bruno Fassino <fassino@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> If we choose the second option, the first paragraph of that section
>>> would instead look like this:
>>>
>>> | Computing the clearance of an element on which 'clear' is set is
>>> | done by first determining the hypothetical position of the element's
>>> | top border edge within its parent block.  This position is
>>> | determined after the top margin of the element has been collapsed
>>> | with all appropriate adjoining margins per normal margin-collapse
>>> | rules, except that the clearing element's top margin is not allowed
>>> | to collapse with the clearing element's bottom margin.
>>
>>
>> Hmm, I'm not sure to agree with:
>>  "except that the clearing element's top margin is not allowed to
>> collapse with the clearing element's bottom margin"...
>> Based on what I said before I would rather change that with:
>>  "but assuming that the clearing element has a non-zero bottom border"
>> which excludes from the computation of the hypothetical position the
>> clearing element's bottom margin _and_ margins of following siblings.
>> But this is probably different from what you wanted to say.
>
> Nah, that's equivalent.  Saying "assume the element has a non-zero
> bottom border", though, is just an indirect way of saying "don't let
> the element's top and bottom margins collapse together", which is what
> we actually want.
>
> ~TJ
>


Fine!  So you agree to exclude from the computation of the
hypothetical position the margins of following siblings, don't you?

And of course this exception is just for the hypothetical position
computation. After that, if clearance has been deemed necessary it
determines the position of the clearing element's top border edge, and
then collapsing with "following" margins still occurs (but it cannot
affect the top border edge anymore). True? (The only remaining
exception is the collapsing with the parent block's bottom margin,
explicitly mentioned at 8.3.1).


Bruno

-- 
Bruno Fassino http://www.brunildo.org/test
Received on Wednesday, 30 June 2010 15:30:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:28 GMT