W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2012

Re: [css3-box] run-ins: an alternative model

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 17:42:37 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDAp_b9sGDrtVSJyWpOHA6EhQQ7ueGMRB8Hz6TypSBEFPw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style@w3.org
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> On 8/7/12 8:20 PM, fantasai wrote:
>>      * If a run-in is preceded by an inline box (ignoring any anonymous
>>        inline boxes containing only collapsed white space),
>>        then it forces the creation of an anonymous block boundary
>>        between it and the preceding inline.
>
>
> I'm not sure this works, for two reasons:
>
> 1)  In a sequence of run-ins, a previous one would trigger this for a later
> one, right?

No.  Run-ins *lay out* like inlines, but they're not inlines, and so
don't trigger that clause.  (They're inline-level.)

> 2)  "an anonymous block boundary" needs to be defined.  There are several
> different ways to do this which may not be equivalent when floats are around
> (e.g. whether anonymous blocks get nested or not).

I presume that the intended effect would be the same as if the run-in
was a block - the preceding inline content is wrapped in an anonymous
block.

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 8 August 2012 00:43:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:58 GMT