W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2010

Re: [css3-content] ::outside become "containing block"

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 09:04:22 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTimAysQq5EjZn60IPBApIpcCdPbE3xxYavRLKS85@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: Paul Duffin <pduffin@volantis.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 8:27 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> On 6/10/10 11:02 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 12:55 AM, Paul Duffin<pduffin@volantis.com>
>>  wrote:
>>> I don't mean to hassle but I have a deadline and really need an answer. I
>>> know it could change in future and I can deal with that (vendor specific
>>> pseudo element) I just wanted to minimize the risk.
>> If you have a deadline, then avoid ::outside.  No browser implements
>> it, nor plans to in the near future.
> If I understood correctly, Paul is planning on implementing it.

Oh, that changes things.

Then, um, still shrug.  Generated Content is fairly old and lost its
editor years ago.  I plan to pick it up later this year, but by "pick
it up" I mean "drop most of it and push out a relative handful of
useful things that we want to see implemented quickly".  ::outside is
very likely to be one of those dropped things.  (I want ::outside or
something similar, but I'm fine with seeing it in GC Level 4.)

Just from the spec, though, this area is underdefined.  I *suspect*
that ::outside's containing block is its superior's containing block,
and that it can (when appropriate) be the containing block for its
superior, exactly as if you'd simply wrapped the superior in a <div>.
But I can't say off the top of my head if that will interact properly
with inheritance.

(Personally, I suspect an ::inside pseudo would work better.  It would
wrap the superior's children, rather than wrapping the superior

Received on Thursday, 10 June 2010 16:05:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:07:47 UTC