- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 11:37:21 +0200
- To: www-style@w3.org
On Tuesday 2012-05-08 11:11 +0200, L. David Baron wrote: > * 'child-align' should be removed since there's no reason to > separate it from 'content-align': if an element's children > support 'box-align' or auto margins then 'content-align' is > perfectly fine to use as the default rather than needing a > separate property for this Actually, it just occurred to me that there might be a reason to have this separation: if we want one property (likely 'child-align', but probably renamed to just 'align' and also applying to the element itself) to be inherited by default ("Inherited: yes") and the other not to be. That's not what's described in [1], where all properties are currently marked "Inherited: no", but it would be what's needed to represent HTML's align attribute in a simple way in CSS. -David [1] http://fantasai.inkedblade.net/style/specs/css3-align/ -- 𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂 𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2012 09:38:18 UTC