- From: Chris Lilley <Chris.Lilley@sophia.inria.fr>
- Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 02:54:55 +0200 (MET)
- To: "David Perrell" <davidp@earthlink.net>, "Chris Lilley" <Chris.Lilley@sophia.inria.fr>, "www-style" <www-style@w3.org>, "Todd Fahrner" <fahrner@pobox.com>
On Jun 4, 5:32pm, David Perrell wrote: > As for what happens when a block element has been declared inline...my > first inclination is to say it should be appended to the preceding > element, so that if an inline list were to follow this comma-terminated > paragraph, 1. The list would be a continuation of the paragraph. 2. > Without special treatment of :before and :after pseudo-elements -- > which could be different on the first and/or the last list element -- > it would be of limited usefulness. Not at all, you have a very compact presentation there. Once we start thinking about the presentations of a document rather than the presentation, what you described above becomes a valuable display method for fitting a lot into a small space. Which may be because I am using a PDA, or because my browser window is one of the less important windows and I want it small and compact for looking up information while carrying out some other activity with the greater part of my screen real-estate. > If :before and :after applied to all elements it would be relatively > simple to construct inline lists from existing elements, using classes > for first and last element and given some counter mechanism. I am really glad to hear that. Most interesting propsal. Yes, I agree that constructing either inline lists or the more usual block-style indented lists or indeed other types is best acheived with a :before and a :after. The cue-before and cue-after properties in ACSS could also disappear. > And > speaking of counters, why not treat decimal | lower-roman | upper-roman > | lower-alpha | upper-alpha | as sibling-counters in any :before and > :after pseudo-element? The counter would have to increment with each > subsequent base element occurrence regardless of class. Yes, I would not expect a <li class=foo> to screw up the numbering > > Actually there has been recent discussion about what happens with a > multiply > > nested list where different list items have left-to-right and > right-to-left > > directionality and then some joker sets the entire enclosing UL to be > > display: inline. > > You mean like (1) A phrase in english. .cibirA ni noitinifed A (a) > .cibirA ni noitinifed rehtonA (b) > > That seems kinda silly. Perhaps a new line should occur when direction > changes, regardless of display type. That would make sense in some but not all situations, because you don't want simple inline quotes to cause a newline. The arabic word for foo is OOF and the Hebrew translation is OOF. The arabic word for foo is OOF and the Hebrew translation is OOF . <aside> a real, genuine use for a full stop in a line all by itself</aside> It's specifying what happens in the screwball cases that takes the time, because the software has to cope with this stuff without a pilot. But simple one or two-level embeddings are reasonably foresable The israeli interpreter said OOF IS foo ROF DROW WERBEH EHT. -- Chris Lilley, W3C [ http://www.w3.org/ ] Graphics and Fonts Guy The World Wide Web Consortium http://www.w3.org/people/chris/ INRIA, Projet W3C chris@w3.org 2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93 +33 (0)4 93 65 79 87 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 1997 20:55:05 UTC