W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2011

Re: [CSS21] Table fix-up algorithm: elements vs boxes

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 14:56:06 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTikTHHb09WQkjFkQFCqVujx0-n+c8k=R937A5+1k@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> On 2/7/11 4:33 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> <!doctype html>
>> <style>
>> .table { display: table; }
>> .cell { display: table-cell; }
>> </style>
>> <div class=table>
>>  <div class=cell>foo</div>
>>  <span class=cell>bar</span>
>>  <span>foo
>>    <div class=cell>bar</div>
>>  baz</span>
>> </div>
>>
>> The table has 5 child boxes (ignoring anonymous inlines containing
>> only whitespace), because the second<span>  is split by its<div>
>> child.
>
> No, it's not.  That <div> is display:table-cell, which is not block-level
> per 9.2.1 and hence does not trigger the algorithm in 9.2.1.1.  And then per
> 17.2.1 it gets wrapped in an inline-table anonymous box, which is still not
> block-level.
>
> But yes, the ordering of 17.2.1 and 9.2.1.1 really needs to be defined
> better (and we definitely need a test for this in the test suite).

Ah, I see.  That explains the behavior a little better.

~TJ
Received on Monday, 7 February 2011 23:02:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:37 GMT