Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-ruby] siblings/children vs in-flow siblings/children in box fixup (#4958)

The CSS Working Group just discussed `css-ruby] siblings/children vs in-flow siblings/children in box fixup`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: make the proposed change to make processing of ruby only work on inflow content`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;dael> Topic: css-ruby] siblings/children vs in-flow siblings/children in box fixup<br>
&lt;dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4958<br>
&lt;castastrophe> castastrophe+<br>
&lt;dael> florian: fixup step. Ruby has structure and needs right boxes.<br>
&lt;dael> florian: Steps written as if they're exhaustive. But they're not b/c ignoring out of flow children of a ruby structure<br>
&lt;dael> florian: I think if something is abspos of ruby it isn't meant to be fixedup. I think things out of flow are left as is. If that's the intent it should say inflow chilred where it says children. If intent is something else I need to know what<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Ruby should only be in flow stuff.<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Out of flow should be ignored to extent we can ignore it<br>
&lt;dael> florian: I've written text in issue, but it's adding inflow in places where it's implied<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: Let's add it<br>
&lt;dael> fantasai: We can move on unless there's anything else<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: Objections to make the proposed change to make processing of ruby only work on inflow content<br>
&lt;dael> RESOLVED: make the proposed change to make processing of ruby only work on inflow content<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4958#issuecomment-634792889 using your GitHub account

Received on Wednesday, 27 May 2020 16:45:03 UTC