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

Re: [CSS21] background-position and background-repeat applicable on inline-block and inline-table elements

From: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 18:00:35 +0100
To: "www-style@gtalbot.org" <www-style@gtalbot.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: "W3C www-style mailing list" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.wohti9sqbunlto@oyvinds-desktop>
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 08:56:55 +0100, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>  
wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 9:15 PM, "Gérard Talbot" <www-style@gtalbot.org>  
> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> "
>> The tiling and positioning of the background-image on inline elements is
>> undefined in this specification. A future level of CSS may define the
>> tiling and positioning of the background-image on inline elements.
>> "
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/colors.html#propdef-background-position
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/colors.html#propdef-background-repeat
>>
>> I need to be sure: inline-block elements and inline-table elements are  
>> not
>> inline elements??
>
> Correct.  They are inline-level, but not inline.  The latter is
> reserved for actual "display:inline" non-replaced elements.

I don't think the term "inline element" excludes replaced elements, nor  
that it should do so. I haven't found any definition for it, so I've  
assumed it must mean "element whose used(?) value of 'display' is  
'inline'".

The spec already uses the term "non-replaced inline element" several  
places. Maybe the sentences quoted above should have done that as well,  
though since the contents of replaced elements are already defined to be  
outside the scope of CSS, it doesn't really matter much.

-- 
Øyvind Stenhaug
Opera Software ASA
Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2012 17:01:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:21:03 GMT