- From: gitspeaks via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2024 14:59:52 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
>What makes you think that the definition needs to depend on M1 and M2? There’s no question of dependency here. I didn’t introduce M1 and M2—you did. I’m simply trying to follow your reasoning. The definition I proposed explains what it means for any two margins to be said to 'collapse through,' in a recursive way. @Loirooriol: >But the definition is more like, given an element E, we say that margins can collapse through E if the top (block-start) and bottom (block-end) margins of E are adjoining. @gitspeaks: >This doesn’t define collapse of adjoining top (block-start) and bottom (block-end) margins of E itself as being what is termed "collapse through." @Loirooriol: >What do you mean? I mean it does not allow for @SelenIT’s interpretation. >"Collapse through an element" means that its own top and bottom margins are combined into one margin. In particular, it says nothing about E itself (specifically, 'its _own_ top and bottom margins'). -- GitHub Notification of comment by gitspeaks Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11306#issuecomment-2511773026 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 2 December 2024 14:59:53 UTC