- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 19:47:01 +0100
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 07/23/2014 03:18 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 4:19 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: >> Right now the CSS Ruby spec has a rule to "inlinize" the display types >> of any boxes inside the ruby container. This is to prevent block-in-inline >> splits of ruby structures and other such fun complications. >> See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Jul/0028.html >> >> bz brought up the point that float handling isn't really considered in >> the spec: if it contains a float, is the ruby structure the containing >> block for that float, or, like regular inlines, does it get passed up >> to the ruby structure's containing block? >> >> Ruby is supposed to be a sort of fancy inline box: it breaks across >> lines, its contents (ideally) participate in the line's justification, >> etc. I think you could make an argument that ruby *annotations* are >> little block containers, but the base text certainly isn't. >> Also, I think it's probably best if the base and annotation layers have >> similar behavior. >> Therefore, imho, ruby containers should not trap floats. >> >> Which brings us to, what *do* they do with floats? There are two reasonable >> options here: >> A. Pass them up to the containing block, just like normal inlines do. >> B. Ignore 'float', similar to how we ignore block-levelness. >> >> Since there are, afaik, no real use cases for putting floats inside ruby, >> either option is fine. What do implementers prefer? > > Speaking as not an implementor, I think it should just be A. Rubys > are just inlines with more powers, and shouldn't act differently > unless there's a good reason related to their rubyness. The CSSWG took this up and agreed, so I've clarified the spec accordingly. ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 11 August 2014 16:46:59 UTC