Re: [CSS3-UI] text-overflow:ellipsis (freshly rewritten/expanded and incorporated into editor's draft)

tl;dr update: text-overflow ellipsis fixed to be styled according to
the element not the text it replaces. for further questions/details,
please provide specific illustrative test cases.


detailed replies:

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 08:40, Brad Kemper <> wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2011, at 10:53 PM, Tantek Çelik wrote:
>> As planned, I have moved the skeleton definition of
>> text-overflow:ellipsis from CSS3-Text[1] to CSS3-UI[2], and then
>> expanded it to address new information and details.
>> I've applied the filter of only documenting what appears to be
>> interoperably implemented,
> The last sentence, "The ellipsis should be styled consistent with the text being ellipsed," does not seem to be describing what is happening in Webkit. The text that gets replaced can be a different color than its block parent with the text-overflow:ellipsis, but it still uses the parent color, not the text color. Try this in the snippet editor, and then resize the window:
> <style>
> p { overflow:hidden; text-overflow:ellipsis; font-size:3em; color: purple; }
> span { background:yellow; padding-left:2em; color:green; }
> </style>
> <p>hjadhsfjkdsdjkshfjkshfjjhsjkfh<span>sjkfhsjkfhjksfdsk</span></p>


On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 00:58, Robert O'Callahan <> wrote:
> Also, I believe one feature that *has* been interoperably implemented is
> that the ellipsis is styled with the style of the block on which
> text-overflow was set, not the style of the text it replaces, contrary to
> what you've drafted.

Confirmed in Safari and Opera and updated accordingly.

Thanks very much for the test-case and correction Brad and confirmation Robert.

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 11:04, Ambrose LI <> wrote:
> 2011/1/22 Simon Fraser <>:
>> On Jan 21, 2011, at 10:53 pm, Tantek Çelik wrote:
>> Also, I don't think "ellipsed" is a word. I see "ellipsize" used in programming contexts, but I'm not sure this is a word either. It may be best to use "truncated".
> I think the verb form of "ellipsis" is "elided", but "truncated" is
> probably better.

I appreciate the feedback.

We're not quite at the point where editorial polishing is worth it -
as text is likely to change more for functional reasons (e.g. in this
case, the quoted text has already been removed for functional

Please await a public LCWD for editorial comments. Thanks!

On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 00:56, Robert O'Callahan <> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 7:53 PM, Tantek Çelik <>
> wrote:
>> I've applied the filter of only documenting what appears to be
>> interoperably implemented,
> Unfortunately, only the simplest situations are handled interoperably among
> IE, Webkit and Opera, so documenting the interoperable stuff leaves most
> behavior undefined :-).

If that's so, then web authors/developers are unlikely to be depending
on things other than "the simplest situations".

That will do for CSS3-UI.  Anything that is currently not
interoperable among the three implementations I will leave explicitly
undefined / up to the implementation in CSS3-UI.

If any particular implementation thinks they have the best answer for
any of these details, I'm willing to write-up such details in CSS4-UI
assuming other implementations agree and are ok with changing their
implementations accordingly.

I encourage test cases illustrating such non-interoperable behavior
*now* however, in the interest of providing implementations the
opportunity to proactively change to interoperate on such details,
which I will then be more than happy to add to CSS3-UI.

> See for some
> examples.

Already did as cited in my original message of this URL:

If there are specific cases from those lists that you're worried about
please list them specifically, preferably with an illustrative test
case. Otherwise I leave the implementation of such details up to
specific implementations, per their judgment (what's best for web
developers / performance etc.)




-- - I made an HTML5 tutorial!

Received on Sunday, 23 January 2011 19:03:31 UTC