- From: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>
- Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 01:57:33 -0800
- To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- CC: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
That's an awesome idea. Looking at how containing block is defined it seems to make sense that it is a good place to look for line grid. Something needs to be said about regular nested blocks and inheritance though. In non-positioned case, containing block is the nearest ancestor block, which may not be the one that we want to define the grid. In fact the most typical case is a P inside BODY, where P has a margin of 1em and BODY has line grid of 1.2em, so if P simply resets the grid for its children it is not working. Is there a way to make that most common case work without adding a line to containing block definition? Actually... the whole deal with line grids transcending blocks clearly asks for a special case wrt containing blocks. The more I think about it, the more it seems to make sense to define line grid together with a block which owns it, which may not be any of currently defined containing blocks... -----Original Message----- From: Håkon Wium Lie [mailto:howcome@opera.com] Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:24 AM To: Alex Mogilevsky Cc: Håkon Wium Lie; Tab Atkins Jr.; L. David Baron; www-style@w3.org Subject: RE: [css3-linebox] aligning lines I don't want to change the definition of containing block. Can't we just say that if the containing block has line-stacking-strategy: grid set, then the grid -- as defined by the line-height of the containing block -- will be honored? -h&kon Håkon Wium Lie CTO °þe®ª howcome@opera.com http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Saturday, 3 January 2009 09:58:16 UTC