- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2006 11:51:41 +0100
- To: www-style@w3.org
On Sun, 24 Dec 2006 11:30:50 +0100, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org> wrote:
> Not very strong arguments, are they? :-)
Depends on whether or not you want to exit CR at some point ;-)
>> http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/css/box/inline/008.xml
>> http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/css/box/inline/018.html
>> http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/css/box/table/empty-cells/006.html
>> Perhaps it's better for empty inline elements to not generate empty
>> inline boxes.
>
> Why should there be a difference between empty and non-empty elements? I
> don't see why <span>x</span> should have different height and margins
> then <span></span> (or indeed <span> </span>, even if the space is
> collapsed).
Spaces are ignored for the definition of "empty element" as well it seems,
except when white-space is set to pre or equivalent. (Same for comments,
processing instructions and the like.)
> Anyway, you'll need empty elements to generate boxes for cases like
> these:
>
> strut {line-height: 2em}
> square {margin-left: 1em}
> another-square {content: "\2003" /* em space */}
>
> <p>Some text<strut/> more text<square/> and <another-square/>
>
> Netscape's HTML extension <spacer> is also an example.
For those you could use inline-block, not?
Anyway, I'm happy to get our behavior "fixed", but I think we'll only do
it after it has been fixed in Internet Explorer and Firefox. We're not
really in the position to break pages.
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Sunday, 24 December 2006 10:51:54 UTC