- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 08:43:18 -0700
- To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Cc: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au> wrote: > This extra line box interferes with the table layout algorithm, which makes > the second cell end up with its own independent table and table-row layout > boxes around it. This is undesirable. > > It seems that with bindings, this is likely to be a common scenario, where > it would be useful to eliminate the effect of unwanted layout boxes from a > binding. > > For this, one solution we came up with was a new value for 'display' that > means to not generate a layout box for the element, but to still render the > child content within as if the element itself wasn't there. > > display: transparent; > > Such a value would mean the shadow element could be toggled between 'none' > and 'transparent', and thus not have any unwanted side effects on the > layout. +1. We have also run into this problem in our discussion of XBL2/Component use-cases, and in fact already use essentially this concept in our Component implementation - the root of a shadow tree is implemented as an element, but it doesn't appear in the box tree. ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 7 April 2011 15:44:05 UTC