W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > March 2019

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-overflow-3] Allowing (or not) alternate ellipsis behavior for block-overflow (#2905)

From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 16:40:10 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-474921216-1553100007-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
The CSS Working Group just discussed `Allowing (or not) alternate ellipsis behavior for block-overflow`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: Accept the edits in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2905`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;dael> Topic:  Allowing (or not) alternate ellipsis behavior for block-overflow<br>
&lt;dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2905<br>
&lt;dael> florian: Mats complained about previous state of spec and way we insert alt ellipsis.  one problem was spec defined that we insert ellipsis text as normal run of text on last line. Unfortunate side effect of that is it could grow line height it could introduce loops<br>
&lt;dael> florian: Left undefined how to break the loop. But b/c this is hard we included a may that if you can't solve that you can just do it at paint time andnot effect layout<br>
&lt;dael> florian: Complaint is that main logic is undefined and alter log available.<br>
&lt;dael> florian: Edited into spec is a solution for both. Main is simplified and may removed. Still insert at layout but text inserted has line-height 0 so it removes content due to fragmentation so if you remove a tall inline it gets smaller, but it can't shrink the line. Could change, but no loops. Therefore don't need simpler alternative as a may<br>
&lt;dael> florian: Request is approve edits in place in thespace<br>
&lt;dael> florian: This too was discussed in after F2F meeting<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: I'm assuming Mats is okay with edits?<br>
&lt;dael> florian: Mats wasn't looped in. Had previous resolution half a year ago to go in this direction but specifics not written until recently. Since heycam is running with this that's whose feedback we focused on<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Makes sense<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Any additional feedback before resolve to accept the edits?<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Objections to accept the edits?<br>
&lt;dael> RESOLVED: Accept the edits in https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2905<br>
&lt;dael> florian: Thank you<br>

GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2905#issuecomment-474921216 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2019 16:40:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:26:58 UTC