- From: Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 16:51:31 -0800
- To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- CC: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On 01/23/2014 04:02 PM, Brad Kemper wrote: > Despite what is alleged in the link, all major browsers do > honor 'display: none' on a BR element Thanks -- I hadn't tried that use-case. I've updated my general "is br stylable" test page to include that now (and I can confirm that "display:none" does work in Gecko, Blink, and Presto, at least): http://people.mozilla.org/~dholbert/tests/br-tests.html > I think that WHATWG should change its incorrect definition, > and should say that it is treated as though it was a glyph, > and not as an element, except for a limited set of properties > and values. I like the idea of treating it as a glyph, though I don't know how well that jives with having CSS styles apply (since I don't know of any other glyphs that can be directly styled). I guess it boils down to the details of what "treated as though it was a glyph" actually means. :) ~Daniel
Received on Friday, 24 January 2014 00:51:58 UTC