- From: David Perrell <davidp@earthlink.net>
- Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 19:52:52 -0800
- To: "Jim King" <jimk@mathtype.com>
- Cc: "Hakon Lie" <howcome@w3.org>, <www-style@w3.org>, <dsr@w3.org>
Jim King wrote: > You're assuming here that a replaced item can actually have a font-size. Is > that true? It can't have a line-height currently. I suppose it can't have a font-size, since font-size implies line-height. So my example is bogus. The designers did a admirable job fitting the default HTML treatment of replaced elements into the CSS model. But, IMO, two changes would make the spec more versatile without screwing up current behavior: (1) Allow any measurement for 'vertical-align', not just percentage. (2) Specify that relative measurements such as 'em' and 'ex' should refer to the parent's font if the element has no font-size property. These changes would allow both sizing and vertical alignment of images relative to the surrounding text. I see no side effects from these enhancements. Am I missing something? David Perrell
Received on Monday, 16 December 1996 23:05:30 UTC