- From: L. David Baron via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 23:45:55 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
It might be preferable to use a **should not** rather than a **must not** for the author requirement; I think we've shied away from using **must**-level requirements on authors, since we know they're not actually going to be honored. I think the "like if they never had any other display time" is ambiguous as to which "other" it's referring to: does it mean the <code>table-*</code> type or its <code>inline</code> or <code>block</code> replacement. I'm curious if you have data on how well this matches existing implementations. (E.g., do they follow this block/inline distinction, and do they follow these rules for anonymous box generation and whitespace collapsing?) -- GitHub Notification of comment by dbaron Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/508#issuecomment-260081736 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 11 November 2016 23:46:01 UTC