- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:32:08 -0800
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>, www-style@w3.org
On Wednesday 2011-11-23 13:29 -0800, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net> wrote: > > On 23/11/2011 00:09, L. David Baron wrote: > >> > >> On Tuesday 2011-11-22 12:31 -0800, fantasai wrote: > >>> > >>> So that we can disentangle boxes from elements and logical boxes from box > >>> pieces in our CSS3 specs, I'm proposing the following terminology > >>> (borrowing > >>> from Rossen's work on css3-break): > > > > I'm happy with the idea of disentangling these concepts (of course), but I > > share David's concerns about pseudo-elements. > > I don't really share these concerns. ::before, ::after, ::marker, and > many other pseudo-elements we have thought about adding are basically > normal boxes. It's only ::first-line, and to a somewhat lesser extent > ::first-letter, that cause problems. These should be called out > specially, so that by default all the other well-behaved > pseudo-elements work normally without us having to go to extra effort > and verbosity. And ::selection, and more importantly, region styling (css3-regions). Why do we need to refer to elements, anyway? If we switch to using correct element vs. box terminology, then I don't think we should have to refer to elements very often outside of defining selectors and box tree construction (where we generally will want to distinguish). So saying "elements and tree-like pseudo-elements" shouldn't be too hard to say in the small number of cases where it's needed. -David -- 𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂 𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
Received on Wednesday, 23 November 2011 22:32:37 UTC