- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 18:47:54 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 05/26/2011 05:52 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Brad Kemper<brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote: >> Overall, I like where it's going. I've started giving it a more thorough read, and here are my thoughts so far on the new bits: > > Thanks for the review, Brad! > > >> On May 24, 2011, at 1:47 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >>> 1. Split the 'outside' value for list-style-position into two values, >>> 'outside' and 'hanging', reflecting the two classes of outside >>> positioning that browsers actually do (Webkit and IE's behavior is >>> close to the new 'outside', while Firefox and Opera are close to the >>> new 'hanging'). 'hanging' attaches the marker to the outside of the >>> text, while 'outside' attaches it to the box, and makes it draw some >>> things (like 'direction') from the parent element. >> >> • Is there any author benefit to this difference? If not, we should >> just pick one and let the inconsistent UAs converge on one behavior, >> and call it 'outside'. So far, the differences seem rather esoteric >> to me. > > We need 'outside', as it plays better with mixed-direction content. > Fantasai says that 'hanging' is useful. A 'hanging' marker, for > example, pays attention to 'text-align'. (So does 'inside', but > 'hanging' doesn't mess with the alignment of the content.) I'm actually skeptical about the usefulness of 'hanging', and prefer 'outside', assuming it has reasonable float-impact behavior. I can't think of a use case for it, other than backwards-compat with default HTML list styling. The ability to match the ::marker's direction to that of the parent element (rather than the list-item element) is important. However, I don't think the layout model should be conflated with this particular issue. ~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 31 May 2011 06:13:35 UTC