- 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