- From: John Jansen <John.Jansen@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 16:13:16 +0000
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- CC: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: fantasai [mailto:fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net] > Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 11:33 PM > To: John Jansen > Cc: Øyvind Stenhaug; www-style@w3.org > Subject: Re: [CSS2.1] min-/max-width on *table-* > > On 03/10/2011 04:22 PM, John Jansen wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] > On > >> Behalf Of Øyvind Stenhaug > >> Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 8:29 AM > >> To: www-style@w3.org > >> Subject: [CSS2.1] min-/max-width on *table-* > >> > >> The resolution of issue 170 > >> (<http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1#issue-170>) says to make > >> min-/max- height on table-row/table-row-group/table-cell undefined. > >> But what about min-/max-width (which was also mentioned in that > thread)? > >> > >> Those properties are said to apply to table, inline-table and all > >> table-* elements except table-row and table-row-group, but section > >> 10.4 doesn't consider those display types at all and I don't see any > >> mention of "min- "/"max-" in chapter 17. > >> > >> -- > >> Øyvind Stenhaug > >> Core Norway, Opera Software ASA > >> > > Hi Øyvind, > > > > Thank you for your feedback. The CSSWG resolved not to make these > > changes to the CSS 2.1 specification[1], and to leave it undefined. We > > will be reevaluating this issue for errata and future versions of CSS. > > John, the WG did not reject any changes requested by Øyvind. We > addressed his issue, which is specifically, to address min-/max-width on table > rows/groups/cells. We happened to address it by making it *explicitly* > undefined, but Øyvind was not asking for a particular definition. > > If Øyvind does not agree with our method of addressing his concern, then he > should make that known, but his feedback was /accepted/, not /rejected/. > > ~fantasai My apologies for the confusion. Fantasai is correct. -John Jansen
Received on Friday, 11 March 2011 16:13:49 UTC