W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > April 2017

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-writing-modes] Question about implementability of the "different writing-mode value than its containing block" section of the spec

From: Koji Ishii via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 04:33:45 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-293778183-1492058023-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
> On the box tree.

Oh, right. Blink is still in the middle of separating style/box tree (AFAIU) and we can do it only after it's done.

I checked [CSS Cascade](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-cascade-4/) but all it says is "parent" or "parent element". Maybe we should follow that, and fix CSS Cascade to describe it better.

> > Is the logic mentioned here the same as blockificaiton?

> No, it's not. blockification never leads to an inline-outside display type, while the logic here very much does (inline-block).

Oh, I see. I thought blockification changes inline to inline-block but it looks like I was too biased to writing mode roots.

* Change "containing block" to "parent element".
* File a bug to CSS Cascade to define "parent element", including re-considering the terminology (since element is the same terminology in DOM)

Are these correct actions to solve this?

GitHub Notification of comment by kojiishi
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1212#issuecomment-293778183 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 13 April 2017 04:33:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:41:11 UTC