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.

So:
* 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