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

Re: root list item Re: [CSS21] 12.5 Lists

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 16:54:28 -0800
Message-ID: <4D703844.20102@inkedblade.net>
To: Peter Moulder <peter.moulder@monash.edu>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, www-style@w3.org
On 09/07/2010 08:14 PM, Peter Moulder wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 10:31:44PM -0400, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>> On 9/7/10 5:28 PM, Peter Moulder wrote:
>>
>>> Gecko doesn't display marker box for root list-item; I haven't yet
>>> determined whether this is a display issue or it's being forced to be
>>> display:block.
>>
>> The latter.  This seems to be what
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-CSS21-20030915/visuren.html#display-prop
>> (and earlier drafts) called for.
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/CR-CSS21-20040225/visuren.html#display-prop
>> is the first draft with the current verbiage, which treats the root
>> the same way positioned and floated boxes are treated....
>>
>> I'll get a bug filed on this.
>
> OOC, why was this changed?  Not being familiar with the weird and wonderful
> ways in which authors use CSS, I'd have thought it not a particularly important
> use case in CSS2.1, and I wouldn't mind if the spec marked it as undefined
> whether root list-item becomes block or stays list-item.
>
> One reason that root list-item displeases me is that it means that the box tree
> isn't actually a tree at all, but a forest.  Not a huge deal, but it
> nevertheless seems like more cost than the uses I can see for root list-items
> (beyond what can be achieved with :before and/or a non-root list-item).

Filed as Issue 231
   http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1#issue-231

~fantasai
Received on Friday, 4 March 2011 00:55:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:38 GMT