- From: Loirooriol via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2017 22:48:24 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Loirooriol has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts: == [css-display] Discrepancies among various run-in definitions == The [table of `display` values](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-display-3/#display-value-summary) defines `run-in` as > [inline box](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-display-3/#inline-box) with special box-tree-munging rules [Outer Display Roles for Flow Layout](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-display-3/#outer-role) defines it as > Run-in elements act like inlines or blocks, depending on the surrounding elements. And [Run-In Layout](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-display-3/#run-in-layout) says > A run-in box behaves exactly as an inline-level box, except [...] The first definition seems to imply that run-ins are inline boxes, but with some additional special behavior. The third definition seems to imply that run-ins are not inline boxes, but they behave similarly. Which is it? For example, if some property says it applies to inline boxes, does it apply to run-ins too? I think the second definition is just an obsolete copy-paste from CSS2. The run-in never acts as a block (but can generate an anonymous block parent). Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1491 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 1 June 2017 22:48:31 UTC