- From: Bruno Fassino <fassino@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 19:18:35 +0100
- To: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net> wrote: > As a follow-up to the discovery[1] that Issue 203 (how to determine if > clearance is necessary) was hijacked by another issue (how to calculate > clearance), I present here a summary of how Issue 203 should currently look > on the Issues Wiki, and then I present an analysis of the "calculating > clearance" issue, which needs filing separately. > > Issue 203 should keep its Summary and initial URI, Proposal, Resolution and > Objection. (My objection still holds; see also [1] for a specific test > case.) > > The subsequent URI, Testcases, Resolution and Status should be filed as a > new Issue, whose summary should be "Problems with the second clearance > calculation" or similar. However, I dispute the resolution and the changes > to the testcases. [...] > > I request that the WG reopen this issue (once filed correctly!) and consider > making it obligatory to support the second calculation and, if necessary, > reversing any changes to the test suite. FWIW, I second this request. Allowing "two possible margin collapsing behaviors in the margin-collapse-clear case" seems rather odd (and opens further questions: Is it equivalent to saying that the second clearance calculation in 9.5.2 is optional?...) I also agree with Anton that this issue (about clearance computation) is distinct (related, but well distinct) from the original 203 issue, that was about the definition of the 'hypothetical position' of an element with 'clear', necessary to determine when clearance is necessary. Regards Bruno -- Bruno Fassino http://www.brunildo.org/test
Received on Monday, 21 March 2011 18:19:07 UTC