- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:52:17 -0400
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Because this is what I wound up thinking about at 2am last night when I couldn't sleep...
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.
This solves several problems:
* The behavior of the run-in is no longer determined by its contents.
* We don't have the weird discrepency between
<run-in>some</run-in>
<p>text</p>
where "some text" appears on one line but
<run-in>some</run-in>
text
appears on two lines.
* Multiple run-ins still run-in, so something like
<dt>implementer
<dt>implementor
<dd>(n.) Someone or something that implements.
can render as
*implementer, implementor* (n) Someone or something that implements.
Thoughts? bzbarsky, is this reasonably sane? :)
~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 19 July 2012 13:52:47 UTC