- From: Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 21:15:47 -0700
- To: "Peter Moulder" <peter.moulder@monash.edu>
- Cc: "W3C style mailing list" <www-style@w3.org>
Le Jeu 19 mai 2011 1:57, Peter Moulder a écrit : > The spec has this to say about the behaviour of counters on > display:table-column[-group] elements: > > Section 17.2: > > # Elements with 'display' set to 'table-column' or > # 'table-column-group' are not rendered (exactly as if they had > # 'display: none') http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/tables.html#table-display > CSS 2.1 section 12.4.3 and css3-content section 8.3: > > # An element that is not displayed ('display' set to 'none') cannot > # increment or reset a counter. > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/generate.html#undisplayed-counters > I think a person could quite reasonably conclude that > display:table-column[-group] elements ignore their > counter-increment/-reset properties, whereas all UAs I've tested > other than Konqueror do process counter-increment (and I assume > counter-reset) for these elements. Peter, I just tested Counter-increment applied to elements with 'display' set to 'table-column-group' http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/counter-increment-applies-to-005.htm Counter-increment applied to elements with 'display' set to 'table-column' http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/counter-increment-applies-to-006.htm Results: Firefox 4.0.1, Opera 11.11, Chrome 11.0.696.68 and Konqueror 4.6.3 all display "5" in both testcases, therefore pass those 2 testcases. Incidentally, what I don't like in those 2 testcases is that the counter and counter-increment are not in the scope of a declared counter-reset. Counter-reset applied to elements with 'display' set to 'table-column-group' http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/counter-reset-applies-to-005.htm Counter-reset applied to elements with 'display' set to 'table-column' http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/counter-reset-applies-to-006.htm Results: Firefox 4.0.1, Opera 11.11, Chrome 11.0.696.68 and Konqueror 4.6.3 all display "5" in both testcases, therefore pass those 2 testcases. > > Konqueror behaves strangely for counter increments within a table, Yes. Konqueror 4.6.3 fails these 2 tests: http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/Konqueror4Bugs/ppk-counter-test.html http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE8Bugs/CountingNestedTables.html > so I > hesitate to read much into its results; but in my testing, I have not examined your testcases (that just appeared in the mailing list but will do later). > it honoured > counter-increment on table-column-group but not on table-column. > > Children of table-column[-group] that are suppressed by the rules of > 17.2.1, on the other hand, don't increment counters in any of the UAs > I've tested. > > A very tentative proposal would be: > > - Change "are not rendered (exactly as if ...)" to > "do not generate any boxes"; and be explicit either > that 'counter-reset' and 'counter-increment' still have effect, > or that their behaviour is undefined. Yes. +1 for your proposed change, in particular on being explicit if 'counter-reset' and 'counter-increment' still have effect. > > - Change "that is not displayed (...)" to > "whose 'display' has value 'none'". > > - In section 17.2.1, be explicit that those suppressed children > cannot affect counters. > > Those first couple of changes are a bit risky to change at this point > in CSS 2.1. An alternative would be just to add a sentence to each > that deals just with the interaction between counters and > table-column[-group]. > > pjrm. I think you spotted a flaw, a weakness in the spec. Otherwise a lot of browsers are wrong. regards, Gérard -- CSS 2.1 Test suite RC6, March 23rd 2011 http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/toc.html Contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/ Web authors' contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/web-authors-contributions-css21-testsuite.html
Received on Friday, 20 May 2011 04:16:18 UTC