- From: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 00:06:43 +0200
- To: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
- CC: Rossen Atanassov <rossen.atanassov@microsoft.com>
> What about: > > --- > it becomes a sibling of that ancestor, > following the ancestor along with > any other nodes in this situation > in DOM order. > --- Seems good to me. I would probably say "following directly" to make it clear they're siblings of the ancestor before any other element, but I think it's fine. > We could instead say that > > --- > The descendants of an element or content with > a specified flow may themselves have a > specified flow. If an element or content > has the same specified flow as one of its > ancestors, it moves to the named flow in > place in DOM order within its ancestor. > --- Not a big fan of that one. It's not obvious how you can actually know that it's the case and it doesn't help to solve the case where you have div.in-flow-a > div.in-flow-b >> div.in-flow-a
Received on Thursday, 25 July 2013 22:07:10 UTC