Re: [css-flexbox] Should <br> get lumped into a "contiguous run of text" to form an anonymous flex item? from Tab Atkins Jr. on 2014-01-22 (www-style@w3.org from January 2014)

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 14:48:28 -0800
To: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
Cc: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDCbU+EE6qPEiOC3edOqPKJaAow=-skHj_vASRPBQe+F_g@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com> wrote:
> On 01/22/2014 02:08 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote:
>> However, every browser I've tested [1] *does* seems to lump <br>
>> elements into anonymous flex items.
>
> Side note: This implies that the flex item forced "display" tweak
> (making them block-flavored, from applying the table in CSS 2.1 Chapter
> 9.7) is not having any effect on <br> elements. Indeed, <br> elements
> are pretty resistant to CSS styling; I posted separately to the WHATWG
> today about a possible source of confusion on that point, in the WHATWG
> HTML spec:
> http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2014-January/041906.html

Ugh, this sounds terrible, but if we want to match impls it means that
we need to define a third type of "thing" - an element which generates
naked text rather than a box.

~TJ

Received on Wednesday, 22 January 2014 22:49:15 UTC