- From: Tantek Celik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 15:53:51 -0700
- To: Vadim Plessky <lucy-ples@mtu-net.ru>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "css2-editors@w3.org" <css2-editors@w3.org>
From: Vadim Plessky <lucy-ples@mtu-net.ru> Subject: Re: "inline" elements in CSS2 box model, and "inline-block" in CSS3 Date: Wed, Oct 17, 2001, 7:26 PM > On Wednesday 17 October 2001 11:28, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > | * Vadim Plessky wrote: > | >Therefor, I would like to propose to include (*backport* from CSS3) { > | >display: inline-block; } in CSS2 specifications. > | >It should speedup adoption of "inline-block" by 2-4 years, as > | > manufacturers of mainstream browsers, realistically speaking, > | >can add support for it within 1 year. > | > | Why does this property need to be defined in CSS Level 2 in order to be > | supported? Adding new features through errata is in general not a good > | idea. > > As it's pretty well known, there is none browser on our planet > supporting CSS1. (I mean, *all* of CSS1, without any bugs) You could just shorten that statement to: "there is none[sic] browser on our planet without any bugs" So I don't really see your point. > And CSS1 was introduced ...yehh, in 1996. And IE5/Mac supported all of CSS1 ... in March of 2000 (over 1.5 yrs ago). > So it seems none will support [all] CSS2 until early 2005 or late 2004... Why should any browser support all of CSS2, when portions of CSS2 itself are still broken? I don't think any browser will ever support "all of CSS2". > I have no idea on Microsoft position on this, though. Well, since it wasn't obvious: a. we publicly introduced 'inline-block' over two years ago in the 16 Sep 1999 UI for CSS WD: http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WD-css3-userint-19990916#display b. we implemented display:inline-block in IE5/Mac and IE6/Windows. > BTW: this construction, "inline-block", is quite important for correct > layouting. Strongly agreed. > Current CSS2 layout definition for "vertical" block placement is badly > defined and misleading. Well, I'm not sure if I would make that strong a statement. But I will say that it is "insufficient" - for example, for _easily_ achieving vertically centering effects without relying on position:fixed and display:table-cell hackery. > Adding "inline-block" will clarify this (a little bit :-) and make confusion > smaller. Agreed. > In particular, HTML export filter from word processors should benefit greatly > from writing blocks as "inline-block", instead of writing unnecessary tables. Agreed. However, I don't think this should be a change to CSS2, as it is very much an addition. Should, however, there be a CSS2.1 (which removed the bad/unimplemented bits, and added a few simple improvements), I would be in favor of adding "display:inline-block". Regards, Tantek ........................................................................... Tantek Çelik tantekc@microsoft.com W3C CSS wg representative, HTML wg alternate rep tantek@cs.stanford.edu Tasman Development Microsoft Corporation
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2001 18:51:49 UTC