- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 15:46:40 -0700
- To: Peter Moulder <peter.moulder@monash.edu>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 08/18/2010 07:43 AM, Peter Moulder wrote: > >> | Non-replaced inline blocks, >> | table cells, and table captions are also block container boxes, >> | but are not block-level boxes. > > That sentence has a parsing ambiguity as to whether "non-replaced" associates > just with inline blocks or with all of those things; I suggest "Inline blocks, > table cells, ... are also block container boxes (unless they are replaced > boxes)". > > It surprises me that we want table captions not to be block-level boxes given > that their behaviour seems very much like a block-level box (once the anonymous > table wrapper box has been generated, at least). > > Out of curiosity, what rule(s) concerning block-level boxes are we trying to > avoid here, or what's the reason for choosing for them not to be block-level ? > > Note that section 17.4 currently explicitly says "caption boxes are block-level > boxes", which would conflict with this text. Fixed. >> Section 9.2.4 The 'display' property >> >> # inline-block >> # This value causes an element to generate a block box, which itself >> # is flowed as a single inline box, similar to a replaced element. >> # The inside of an inline-block is formatted as a block box, and the >> # element itself is formatted as an inline replaced element. >> >> s/generate a block...replaced element/generate an inline-level block container/ >> s/single inline/single inline-level/ >> s/an inline replaced element/an atomic inline-level box/ > > I don't see any occurrence of "single inline" after applying the first of those > substitutions, if I'm understanding it correctly. Fixed. ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 19 August 2010 22:47:15 UTC