- 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