- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 08:33:43 -0700
- To: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Cc: Brian Blakely <anewpage.media@gmail.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, www-style@w3.org
On Jun 2, 2011, at 7:56 AM, Simon Fraser wrote: > 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? I would expect the two lines to rotate as though the transform was applied to their bounding box, all without disturbing any of the content outside the span.
Received on Thursday, 2 June 2011 15:34:14 UTC