- From: Vincent Hardy <vhardy@adobe.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 08:12:31 -0700
- To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
- CC: W3C style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
On May 18, 2011, at 6:45 PM, Alex Mogilevsky wrote: > ± From: Vincent Hardy [mailto:vhardy@adobe.com] > ± Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 6:33 PM > ± > ± I liked the proposal you had in a previous email for the property name: > ± > ± Element.contentOverflow > ± > ± For the property values, I prefer a mix of what you propose: > ± > ± overflow | fit | empty > ± > ± I am not sure we need the 'not-a-region' value because in case of non- > ± region element, we could specify that the contentOverflow value is 'fit'. > > I think the property really need to have "region" in the name. Otherwise it may be expected to return overflow status on regular elements, which it is not designed to do... Yes, I agree, good point. > > I have mixed feelings on 'not-a-region'. It is true that regular element can always say 'fit' but it is useless and some kind of "not applicable" would make more sense... But it is still useless... > > Maybe > > Element.regionContentOverflow = overflow | fit | empty > > Or > > Element.regionOverflow = overflow | fit | empty > > ? I'd vote for the later one. Vincent
Received on Thursday, 19 May 2011 15:13:00 UTC