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

Re: [CSS21][css3-flexbox][css3-multicol] (Appendix E) Almost everything is block-equivalent! (Was: Re: [CSS21] (Appendix E) Are inline-blocks "block equivalent"?)

From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 10:03:41 +0200
Message-ID: <4FFE84DD.3050603@moonhenge.net>
To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
CC: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
On 12/07/2012 09:32, Anton Prowse wrote:
> On 15/05/2012 00:05, Anton Prowse wrote:
>> On 11/05/2012 16:07, Simon Sapin wrote:
>>> Appendix E uses this sentence twice:

> I propose the following revision.
>
> Replace:
>     # Step 2: If the element is a block, list-item, or other block
>     #         equivalent:
> with
>     | Step 2: If the element is a block container (or other
>     |         container as defined in future levels of CSS) or
>     |         a block-level replaced element:
>
> and similarly for Step 4.

Oh, and "block-level replaced element" should probably be changed to 
"non-inline-level replaced element" to be forwards-compatible with cases 
such as flex items that are images and which establish new stacking 
contexts (eg through semi-opacity).

Cheers,
Anton Prowse
http://dev.moonhenge.net
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2012 08:04:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:56 GMT