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

Re: [CSS21] Clarifications to run-in

From: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 19:49:37 +0200
To: "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.vkfagziubunlto@oyvinds-desktop>
On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 18:57:33 +0200, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:

> On 10/11/10 11:40 AM, Øyvind Stenhaug wrote:
>>>>> <div>
>>>>> <span style="display: run-in">Run</span>
>>>>> in
>>>>> <div>to here?</div>
>>>>> </div>
>> | 2. Let B be the first of A's in-flow following siblings. If B
>> | exists and generates a non-replaced block box, then A is rendered
>> | as if it were an 'inline' element at the start of B's contents--
>> | after B's list marker box, if any, and before B's ':before'
>> | pseudo-element, if any. (See Chapter 12.)
>> A is the span, B is the inner div.
> No, B is the text node containing "in", at least that was the intent  
> when this text was written.  If that's not obvious, I agree it needs to  
> be clarified.  I guess it's not obvious because of the whole DOM tree vs  
> "element tree" mess....

Yeah. The word "siblings" links to a definition which is about elements  
exclusively. The sentence at the end (and removed in this thread) doesn't  
mention text nodes either:

# In the above, "siblings" and "children" include both normal elements and  
:before/:after pseudo-elements.

And it's not quite the DOM tree either, otherwise really basic cases such  
as this wouldn't run in because of whitespace:


I guess the easiest choice is to hack the "In the above" sentence somehow.  
Given that the rendering structure isn't really defined...

Øyvind Stenhaug
Core Norway, Opera Software ASA
Received on Monday, 11 October 2010 17:48:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 February 2015 12:34:43 UTC