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

Re: [css3-lists] position:marker and compatibility with existing 'outside' implementations/content

From: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 13:45:26 +0200
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.wlall0zcbunlto@oyvinds-desktop>
On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 19:45:41 +0200, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>  
wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>  
> wrote:

>> In general, the model seems quite simple, which is often a good thing.
>> However, in some cases it seems all major implementations would need to
>> change, which makes me wonder if there would be compat issues.
>
> *Every* implementation is unique in how it handles outside marker
> positioning once you go past the most trivial markup.  At best, I
> could just specify one impl's behavior exactly, so that everyone else
> had to change.  What I've done instead is specify something that's
> *very close* to modern IE's behavior, because it was by far the
> sanest.  IE should only have to make trivial changes which only matter
> in edge cases.  Other browsers will have to change in minor or major
> ways.

Right, my concern was due to uncertainty regarding how common such edge  
cases actually are on the web (and how common they will be for browsers  
outside <!--[if IE]> for that matter).

>> 4) However, even so, the vertical alignment will be off if, for  
>> instance,
>> the list-item's contents start with a block that has vertical padding  
>> and/or
>> borders. Not even IE uses the hypothetical 'inside' position in this  
>> case.
>
> Testcase?

OK. The marker is vertically aligned with the text in this case, even in  
IE(9):

<!doctype html>
<ul><li><div style="border: solid">Filler text</div></li></ul>

Or see <http://jsfiddle.net/nLrJZ/1/>.

-- 
Øyvind Stenhaug
Core Norway, Opera Software ASA
Received on Thursday, 27 September 2012 11:45:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:21:00 GMT