- From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 20:32:43 +0200
- To: www-style@w3.org
- CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
On 12/07/2012 19:39, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 12:02 AM, Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net> wrote: >> This additional section looks good. One thing that confused me slightly was >> the following new sentence: >> >> # When determining the baseline of a table cell, a flex container >> # provides a baseline just as a line box or table does. [CSS21] >> >> It took me a few moments to realized that it is referring to the following >> specific part of the CSS21 section that's linked to from that sentence (viz. >> 17.5.3): >> >> # The baseline of a cell is the baseline of the first in-flow line >> # box in the cell, or the first in-flow table-row in the cell, >> # whichever comes first. >> >> The mental wheelspin that I had was caused by the use of the word "table" in >> the new sentence, given that the above-quoted part uses "table-row". > > I'd call that a typo, actually. Fixed to be "table-row". Ah, cool. Thanks! >> I was about to propose that we use "table-row" in the flexbox spec instead >> of "table"... but then it occurred to me that "table-row" is perhaps >> undesirable in CSS21 anyway; maybe it should be "table" and accompanied by >> the new note introduced in the new flexbox section (stating that the >> baseline of a table" is the baseline of its first row). >> >> Yet there's an open issue on what the baseline of a table with no rows >> is,[1] since that concept is needed for other parts of CSS21 as well; and we >> need a web compat review to figure out whether the baseline of a table with >> no rows plays any part in determining the baseline of a cell that contains >> it. If not, we can't make any change to the CSS21 sentence and the flexbox >> sentence would have to change to use "table-row". >> >> [1] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15892 > > We did an impromptu compat review in browsers. Spoilers: it's inconsistent! > > Actually, we're pretty sure the differing results are from Firefox > constructing an anonymous table-row and table-cell in the empty table > (even though the algorithm in the spec wouldn't create any). It then > aligns that row as specified, while WebKit correctly skips over the > row-less table when trying to determine a baseline. We'd need to > actually look at Gecko's code to be sure of this interpretation, > though. > > Hopefully the inconsistency means we don't actually have to worry > about the answer, and can choose whichever one is more convenient. Great; I've added this info to the bug report. Cheers, Anton
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2012 18:33:14 UTC