- From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 07:56:55 -0700
- To: Brian Blakely <anewpage.media@gmail.com>
- Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, www-style@w3.org
On Jun 2, 2011, at 6:27 AM, Brian Blakely wrote: > Boris, > > That is why support for inline elements was originally removed. Which is silly. > > There is a very strong precedent path for cases where popular, but varying, implementations are introduced into spec. > > Restored support for inline elements should follow an analysis of current implementations, and either a single implementation is chosen as the standard, or an amalgam that optimally satisfies. > The problem is that there isn't an implementation that makes sense. Consider an inline element split over 2 lines, with a rotation transform. What do you expect to happen? Simon
Received on Thursday, 2 June 2011 14:57:36 UTC