W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2013

Re: [css3-regions] flow-into: <ident> content-only

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:12:37 -0700
Message-Id: <6EDE90BE-8012-4AFB-AE5B-24C162A9F7B5@gmail.com>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
To: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>


On Apr 19, 2013, at 3:32 PM, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com> wrote:

> I would rather the behavior be consistent than have some elements ignore
> the 'content' keyword.

Replaced elements are already special cases in many areas of CSS, which is why I mentioned ::after. ::before and ::after don't work on replaced elements because with replaced elements we don't have the concept of separating the content box from the content. I don't see the benefit of doing so here, which would be inconsistent with other areas of CSS.

> You can get yourself into the situation of leaving
> behind a border if you use 'content' on any element, really.

That's true. And padding, and box-shadows, and backgrounds, and filters, etc.

> That's the
> main reason I chose to default to 'element' - if you use 'content' you
> have to think about what's going into the named flow and what remains. We
> should add examples showing when it's useful to use 'content' and when
> it's probably better to avoid using it. It's really best when the element
> is mainly a container for other elements.

Yeah. Or raw text.

> I believe ::before and ::after content stay with the element as well in
> the 'content' scenario. There's nothing in the named flow to hang them
> from

Agreed, although I only brought it up in regard to replaced elements.
Received on Saturday, 20 April 2013 00:13:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:10 UTC