- From: Arron Eicholz <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 23:00:44 +0000
- To: Patrick Garies <pgaries@fastmail.us>, "css21testsuite@gtalbot.org" <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
- CC: "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Patrick Garies wrote: > > On 2010-01-25 8:02 PM, Gérard Talbot wrote: > > How about: > > > > <meta name="assert" content="When two siblings are adjoining and their > > margins collapse, then the bottom margin of the last sibling does not > > collapse with the parent's bottom margin when such parent own margins > > collapse and when clearance has occurred." /> > > I'm afraid that I have to disagree with your proposed addition of the word > "then" here. That makes it sound like cause-and-effect when you're > describing a condition and constraint: > > Condition: "two siblings are adjoining and their margins collapse" > Constraint: "the bottom margin of the last sibling does not collapse with the > parent's bottom margin when such [parent's] own margins collapse and > when clearance has occurred" > > The added comma is good. > > "Parent" should be "parent's" (typo?). > > The description still does not make clear where "clearance has occurred"; > does it have to occur on the parent, one of the two siblings, or a combination > thereof? I have completely rewritten the assert now. Please let me know if it makes more sense. -- Thanks, Arron Eicholz
Received on Monday, 1 February 2010 23:01:23 UTC