Re: Proposal: content-vertical-alignment

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
To: "Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com>
Cc: "David Woolley" <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>; <www-style@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 6:56 PM
Subject: Re: Proposal: content-vertical-alignment


|
| On Fri, 1 Jul 2005, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
| >
| > If you have concerns then please tell me how following will look like in
| > CSS:
| >
| > <table width="100%">
| > <tr><td width="30%">one</td><td>two</td><td width="70%">three</td></td>
| > </table>
|
| CSS doesn't define that. It's a source of great frustration to the working
| group, but we have yet to find someone who can actually specify it, sadly.
|
|
| > | I have no idea what "treated as undefined" means. Nothing in CSS is |
| > "undefined" except if you mean "up to the UA" which is something we do
| > our | best to avoid since it only results in non-interoperable
| > behaviour.
| >
| > Does anybody else have troubles with understanding "treated as
| > undefined" ?
| >
| > "will be treated" idiom is already used in CSS, please read:
| > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html
|
| Yes, "treated as" I understand, it's the "undefined" part I have trouble
| with.
|

must be interpreted by user agents as undefined -
must be interpreted by user agents as having no value defined.

Whatever you like.

|
| > | > | What is the computed value of lengths with such
| > | > | units?
| > | >
| > | > Definition by example:
| > |
| > | Definition by example is not good enough for this kind of work, sorry.
| >
| > Sorry, but definition by example is widely used in science
| > and in formal logic in particular.
|
| Definition by example defines one example, it does not define the
| processing model, which is what is needed for a formal proposal.

As far as I understand we a here for
transforming ideas into formal proposals, right?

If you don't like the idea in principle - tell me, I'll understand *your*
opinion and will honour it.
But arguments "this or that are not formal enough" are not
constructive in most cases. Critisizing - propose, the only
way to reach some results in discussion, AFAIK.

|
|
| > | > CSS spec is not formal enough to be considered as a strict and 
formal
| > | > definition.
| > | >
| > | > Example:
| > | > reading
| > | > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/text.html#alignment-prop
| > | > try to design procedure which does text line justification.
| > | >
| > | > "In the case of 'justify', the UA may stretch the
| > | > inline boxes in addition to adjusting their positions"
| > | >
| > | > What are "inline boxes" here? And so on.
| > |
| > | Uh, "inline boxes" is a defined CSS term, see, e.g., 9.2.2.
| >
| > What kind of inline boxes UA may stretch?
|
| Any inline boxes that have white-space: justify. See section 9.4.2.

http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visuren.html#normal-flow

Did not find here neither white-space: justify mentioning
neither justify among list of valid values of white-space.

Moreover white-space as far as understand is not
about inline boxes but rather space between them.

|
|
| > This phrase literally means than UA allowed to change width
| > of <span style="width:100px">
|
| 'width' doesn't apply to inline elements.

But it does for inline-blocks. Right?

|
|
| > | Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``. 
fL
| > | http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ 
,.
| > | Things that are impossible just take longer. 
`._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
| >
| > (Do I owe you something and forgot? Why so ..umm.. sarcastic?)
|
| That's just by signature, nothing personal...

Acknowledged.

|
| -- 
| Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
| http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
| Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Andrew Fedoniouk.
http://terrainformatica.com

Received on Saturday, 2 July 2005 18:45:57 UTC