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

RE: [css3-exclusions] ordering exclusions by z-order

From: Rossen Atanassov <Rossen.Atanassov@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 17:41:08 +0000
To: "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>
CC: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9A57384B9CE9AE4F9C01F3BB5C3D8844014FF6C7@TK5EX14MBXW601.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rocallahan@gmail.com [mailto:rocallahan@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Robert O'Callahan
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 7:33 PM
> 
> Examples in section 2:
> The ‘wrap-flow’ property is used to make an element's generated box an
> exclusion box.
> 
> This language implicitly assumes there is one generated box per element.
> Exclusion area

The language specifies that this is true for the boxes generated by an element. I don't see a reason why this spec should be different than any other and define everything in terms of the obvious one-to-many relation between elements and boxes. Can you point me to a spec besides the CSS3 Fragmentation (which is where all of this actually belongs) that we can use as an example?

> The area used for excluding inline flow content around an exclusion element.
> The exclusion area is equivalent to the border box.
> 
> This language implicitly assumes there is one generated area per element.
> Exclusion element

That is a typo, it should say "exclusion box" instead of "exclusion element". I'll get it fixed, thanks.

> An block-level element which is not a float and generates an exclusion box. An
> element generates an exclusion box when its ‘wrap-flow’ property's computed
> value is not ‘auto’.
> So does this.
> 

(same as my first comment above)

Thanks,
Rossen
Received on Thursday, 31 May 2012 17:42:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:54 GMT