- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 09:04:22 -0700
- 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 itself.) ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 10 June 2010 16:05:16 UTC