- From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
- Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2011 01:41:05 +1100
- To: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 8/01/2011 7:48 AM, Anton Prowse wrote: > Issue 1: 8.1 (Box dimensions) says: > > # The dimensions of the content area of a box — the content width and > # content height — depend on several factors: whether the element > # generating the box has the 'width' or 'height' property set, [...] > > The wording "has the x property set" is sloppy, not least because all > properties exist for all elements within a given @media, at least down > as far as computed value. > > I suggest: > > s/whether the element generating the box has the 'width' or 'height' > property set/the values of the 'width' and 'height' properties for the > element generating the box/ This doesn't make sense. The content box is partly sized by the used values of height and width of the element generating the box. I would suggest. s/'width' or 'height' property set/'width' or 'height' with values other than 'auto'/ > Issue 2: 8.3 (Margin properties) says: > > # Margin properties specify the width of the margin area of a box. > > s/width of the margin area/width of the pieces of margin/ > > since that's what 8.3 is talking about all the way through (eg in the > specification of what <length> values mean). It's most definitely /not/ > talking about the actual margin area width, which is a different thing > entirely. How about width of margin box? > I can't say I'm thrilled with "pieces of margin", but that's what is > already being used in the first paragraph of 8.1, and no preferable term > such as "margin component" appears in Chapter 8. I never notice that it said pieces. Doesn't sound right. How about areas or regions? -- Alan http://css-class.com/ Armies Cannot Stop An Idea Whose Time Has Come. - Victor Hugo
Received on Saturday, 8 January 2011 14:42:44 UTC