W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2012

Re: [css3-box] run-ins: an alternative model

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 12:15:12 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDCBxJVJ2-mwvR=v5U78Kfrr7ad=KRmcrhxbwVm_6a31tw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Sylvain Galineau
<sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote:
> [fantasai:]
>> Model is this:
>>    - run-ins are always treated like elements with ''display: inline''
>>    - except that they mangle the box tree thus:
>>      * Run-ins are only allowed to be the first inline in a block,
>>        or the first inline following other run-ins.
>>        Thus an inline followed by a run in causes the creation
>>        of an anonymous block boundary between the two,
>>        but a run-in followed by an inline form a block together.
>>      * If the last run-in in a sequence is immediately followed
>>        (ignoring out-of-flows and white space) by a block,
>>        the entire sequence gets shifted into that block.
> I'd love to hear about all the use-cases that motivate run-ins. Without those
> I can't form an opinion as to whether a proposal is good/bad. I've heard of
> some in various meetings but if we're going to revisit this it'd be useful
> to put them down on a wiki page.

I've started collecting some on the wiki: http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/box-orphans

> Fwiw this sounds almost...understandable :)

I agree.  I think this is a pretty good definition.

Received on Thursday, 2 August 2012 19:16:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:19 UTC