- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 18:10:21 -0400
- To: Peter Moulder <pjrm@mail.internode.on.net>, www-style@w3.org
On 01/15/2014 04:41 PM, Peter Moulder wrote: > I haven't followed closely the css-foo vs cssN-foo discussion, but consider > mentioning the spelling ‘css-break’ in the Status section. > > > "assumend" -> assumed. (Though maybe you already have spelling check as part > of your publishing checklist.) > > > §2 ‘Fragmentation Model and Terminology’, "fragmentation container" definition wording: > > i) "instead of overlowing it" is slightly "garden path"-ish; and ii) "when it > overflows it doesn't overflow" seems like it could be improved. > > How about "when ... would overflow ..., it prefers instead to ...". > > "Would overflow" isn't very well defined, but I think it's OK in this > context where we're just trying to define a fragmentation container. > > The "prefers" part is to cover the case where there's no suitable > break opportunity (in which case it still overflows). Fixed, thanks! ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 16 September 2015 22:10:55 UTC