- From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
- Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 07:23:23 -0700
- To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 9/13/13 4:04 PM, "Håkon Wium Lie" <howcome@opera.com> wrote: >Alan Stearns wrote: > > > >So, what would your code look like that would produce this example? > > > > > > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-page-floats/exclusions-dropcap.png > > > > That's my example, you know. > > >My preferred solution would be: > > exclude-level: 0.5; > shape-margin: 0.2em; /* or something */ You would probably also need to include some margin-top somewhere (as you do in your specification) to make sure the content did not run through the ascender area above the lower-case letters in this example. So you'd probably still end up with some content-specific styling. As I've said, I think we should have this capability. But my future solution would look something like shape-outside: element(self); shape-margin: 0.2em; Where 'self' is whatever mechanism we use to allow self-references for reflections and other uses of element() that can avoid a cycle (see issue 8 in Images 4 [1]). I don't think we're disagreeing about the end-game. We just have different priorities for what should come first. Thanks, Alan [1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-images/#issue-5a4722f8
Received on Friday, 13 September 2013 14:24:05 UTC