- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 16:17:36 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-ruby] replaced annotation containers and base containers are nonsensical`, and agreed to the following: * `RESOLVED: if you are a replaced element with dipslay of base or annotation container without changing the computed value they're treated as base or annotation respectively` <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <dael> Topic: [css-ruby] replaced annotation containers and base containers are nonsensical<br> <dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6000<br> <dael> florian: Ruby, when we're rendering it's hierarchy of boxes. Externally ruby contain box. Then base containers and annotation containers and in those bases and annotations<br> <dael> florian: What happens if you use display to set a replaced element to be a replaced container. They're replaced so won't contain anything<br> <dael> florian: Spec does not take that into account. Doesn't say anything useful<br> <dael> florian: I think we should do a correction. Computed or used time. If you have replaced element set to base or annotation container they're turend into base or annotation respectively<br> <dael> florian: There's a series of box fixup which makes sure if item is unparent the right hierarcy of anon boxes is generated. That correction is suffient and the rest of the steps would make sure it has the right htings around it<br> <dael> florian: IMportant because base and annotation containers are only barely boxes. Fairly abstract. They're derived from element but properties is limited. More of a rectangle then abox. Trying ot render replaced element as those is not defined.<br> <dael> florian: Innermost element is a box in a tree, but intermediary is more a helper then a box you can style.<br> <dael> astearns: CommentS? Concerns?<br> <dael> astearns: I assume this prop should have test case? Otherwise I expect it would be lost in impl<br> <dael> florian: Sure. Doesn't have but happyt o add<br> <dael> emilio: Do you know how this behaves on FF?<br> <dael> emilio: We don't do anything special, just create a replaced box. Display doesn't effect box you created. Does this need special case?<br> <dael> fantasai: You treat as inline replaced box? Outer display can be inline or block or flex...lot of roles it can play. Question here it doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sence for it to play role of ruby annotation container. Could define it to work but then have to define.<br> <dael> emilio: I think prob treat as an inline outside thing. Worth checking. I misunderstood issue. Don't mind saying treated as whatever. Should not effect display-type. What happens if you style inline with table cell.<br> <dael> florian: If you do at used I don't think issue<br> <dael> emilio: I think we do at used value for every other. If you put img and say display table caption I think computed is table-caption but we treat as inline or block. Just need to decide<br> <dael> florian: Doing it at used value time seems fine. I propose we do that. If you set annotation container it's an annotation at used time. Everything else as it exists. Same for base<br> <dael> emilio: Sounds fine<br> <dael> astearns: Is prop that at used value time we get the appropriate anon box for base and annotation?<br> <dael> florian: don't need that part. there is box fixup that lets us generate container. We need to say if you are a replaced element with dipslay of base or annotation container without changing the computed value they're treated as base or annotation respectively<br> <dael> astearns: Is that & good for resolution florian ?<br> <dael> s/&/^<br> <dael> Prop: if you are a replaced element with dipslay of base or annotation container without changing the computed value they're treated as base or annotation respectively<br> <dael> astearns: Any additional comments or concerns?<br> <dael> dholbert: Questions. First, we should make sure the box fixup code reacts to used value and not computed<br> <dael> florian: Sure<br> <dael> dholbert: I wonder if display ruby for outermost container do we need something like that?<br> <dael> florian: I remember thinking about it and concluding no problem in that case, but don't remember why<br> <dael> astearns: If it ends up being an issue we can add it<br> <dael> florian: I'll think about it. I'm not remembering why I concluded it wasn't<br> <dael> astearns: dholbert are you okay resolving jsut for the two values?<br> <dael> dholbert: Yeah, fine. Makes sense to handle separately<br> <dael> astearns: Other comments?<br> <dael> astearns: Prop: if you are a replaced element with dipslay of base or annotation container without changing the computed value they're treated as base or annotation respectively<br> <dael> astearns: Obj?<br> <dael> RESOLVED: if you are a replaced element with dipslay of base or annotation container without changing the computed value they're treated as base or annotation respectively<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6000#issuecomment-824188125 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 21 April 2021 16:17:39 UTC