- 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