- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 08:08:53 -0500
- To: Alexis Deveria <adeveria@gmail.com>
- Cc: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>, www-style@w3.org
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 8:00 AM, Alexis Deveria <adeveria@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 12:14 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >> Ah, k. I brought it up, actually, because my reading of the spec >> suggests that the stretching should *not* occur. An example or two >> implies it in the suggested rendering, but it doesn't seem to be >> expressed anywhere in the actual rules. I believe they should act in >> every way like ordinary elements placed into an invisible container. > > Ha! I actually just made it stretch in version 1.01 (by simply > stretching the last element). I don't know how big a difference that > makes in practice, but for the purpose of using a background it looks > better to take up the entire slot. An easy thing to change back, > though. Take a look over at section 7 of the draft[1] on the ::slot pseudoelement. You can put backgrounds directly on the ::slot, which is even better than trying to stretch an element across the space for a background. In order to match the capabilities of ::slot, though, you'll probably have to actually insert new elements into the DOM. [1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-css3-layout-20090402/#slot-pseudo ~TJ
Received on Monday, 27 April 2009 13:09:36 UTC