- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 18:00:50 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, Tantek [ISO-8859-1] Çelik wrote: > > Yet more evidence that defining (or at least explaining) inline-block as > being formatted like a replaced element works and makes sense for folks. Oh I don't disagree. It's not really what I want for ::marker though. For ::marker I really just want a normal 'inline' box, except that in the non-replaced case, 'width' has to apply to it, with 'text-align' deciding how stuff is aligned in the resulting box. I also need to define how line breaks and overflow are handled in that case. So 'inline-block' works except that it doesn't interact with the line box using 'line-height', which I think is important for ::marker. -- Ian Hickson )\._.,--....,'``. fL U+1047E /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. http://index.hixie.ch/ `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 11 September 2003 14:00:51 UTC