- From: MURAKAMI Shinyu <murakami@antenna.co.jp>
- Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 12:03:25 +0900
- To: "Martin J. Durst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- Cc: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>, Philippe Wittenbergh <ph.wittenbergh@l-c-n.com>, liam@w3.org, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "public-i18n-cjk@w3.org" <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>
"Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> wrote on 2012/10/11 16:20:31 > On 2012/10/11 16:01, Simon Sapin wrote: > > Le 11/10/2012 08:46, Philippe Wittenbergh a écrit : > >> 'block-before' sounds a bit strange when one wants to apply the > >> equivalent of 'padding-top' to an inline (or inline-block) element. > > Yes, in that case it sounds a bit strange. But overall, I like Liam's > proposal quite a bit, in my eyes it's definitely better than > start/end/head/foot. I like 'block-before' and 'block-after' as terms in the CSS spec, but as keywords in property names and values, 'before' and 'after' are good enough, like 'padding-before' and 'padding-after'. This is same as that the CSS Writing Modes defines 'line-left' and 'line-right' but the property values for those are 'left' and 'right' (in text-align etc.) Shinyu Murakami Antenna House
Received on Friday, 12 October 2012 03:03:54 UTC