- From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
- Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 14:25:07 +0200
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
There appear to be some areas of the spec in which the use of the term "elements" should include pseudo-elements and generated content. Issue 1. In 3.2 (UA Conformance) it says:[1] # 4. For each element in a document tree, it must assign a value for # every property according to the property's definition and the rules # of cascading and inheritance. and in 6.1 (Specified, computed, and actual values) it says:[2] # Once a user agent has parsed a document and constructed a document # tree, it must assign, for every element in the tree, a value to # every property that applies to the target media type. Should pseudo-elements not be mentioned in these sections? Note that in 5.10 (Pseudo-elements and pseudo-classes) it says:[3] # In CSS 2.1, style is normally attached to an element based on its # position in the document tree. [...] # # CSS introduces the concepts of pseudo-elements and pseudo-classes to # permit formatting based on information that lies outside the # document tree. whilst in 5.12.1 (The :first-line pseudo-element) it says:[4] # The following properties apply to a :first-line pseudo-element: # [...]. UAs may apply other properties as well. and in 5.12.2 (The :first-letter pseudo-element) it says:[5] # These are the properties that apply to :first-letter # pseudo-elements: [...]. UAs may apply other properties as well. Certainly, all property definitions and surrounding description uses "elements" when pseudo-elements and generated content could often (depending on the property) equally be the subject. Perhaps this could be made explicit? Issue 2. In 9.2.1 (Block-level elements and block boxes) it says:[6] # Block-level elements (...) generate a principal block box that # contains either only block boxes or only inline boxes. The # principal block box establishes the containing block for descendant # boxes and generated content and is also the box involved in any # positioning scheme. Principal block boxes participate in a block # formatting context. (which fantasai suggests replacing with | Block-level elements generate a principal block-level box that | contains descendant boxes and generated content and is also | the box involved in any positioning scheme. | | [...] | | Except for 'table' elements, which are described in a later chapter, | and replaced elements, the principal block-level box is also a | <dfn>block container box</dfn>.[...] in [7]). Either way, is some generated content itself capable of generating a principle block box, depending on its display type? My impression is that it isn't capable of doing so, but note that in 12.1 (The :before and :after pseudo-elements) it says:[8] # The :before and :after pseudo-elements elements interact with other # boxes, such as run-in boxes, as if they were real elements inserted # just inside their associated element. (Side note: there's a glitch there with "pseudo-elements elements", right?) If generated content is set to be block-level, is the corresponding box a principal block(-level) box or an anonymous block(-level) box? [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/conform.html#conformance [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/cascade.html#value-stages [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/selector.html#pseudo-elements [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/selector.html#first-line-pseudo [5] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/selector.html#first-letter [6] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visuren.html#block-boxes [7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Jul/0383.html [8] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/generate.html#before-after-content Cheers, Anton Prowse http://dev.moonhenge.net
Received on Sunday, 25 July 2010 12:26:41 UTC