- From: Staffan Måhlén <staffan.mahlen@comhem.se>
- Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 19:13:31 +0100
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On 9 Feb 2005 at 13:29, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, [ISO-8859-1] Staffan Måhlén wrote:
> > Ok, so we've got 'inline-block' and 'inline-table'. The 'run-in' depends
> > on following content, but why is there no 'inline-list-item'?
>
> CSS3 probably will. It's on the working group's agenda.
>
Given what you write in another answer i hope not, see below.
> > (IMHO the marker should not be 'display' dependant at all of course).
>
> Not sure what you mean here.
I was trying to say that i don't think 'list-item' is a real
'display' value, its just a block with a marker. The marker "should"
work even if the element was inline or something else, while
'list-style-position' might not apply to all 'display' types.
I think this is probably what you were referring to in your post:
On 9 Feb 2005 at 14:32, Ian Hickson wrote:
...
> el { display: inline; annotate: list-marker; }
> el::marker { ... }
Given something like that and possibly allowing counters to have
multiple levels (i dont see how the CSS3 draft copes with nested
lists):
body:before, ul:before, ol:before,... {counter-push(list-item)}
body:after, ul:after, ol:after,... {counter-pop(list-item)}
one might get the effect that the following author rule would just
work:
li {display: inline}
and li elements could have default style that make them 'block'. I
don't have any idea how 'list-style-type' would work with something
like your annotate-marker though.
/Staffan
Received on Wednesday, 9 February 2005 18:14:00 UTC