- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 10:01:36 -0700
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
> On Mar 24, 2016, at 11:32 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > > [abracadabra, this thread is NECRO'D!] > >> On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >> At the January f2f, we figured out a decent hack that seems to explain >> the rendering of <br> properly: >> >> br { >> display-box: contents; >> content: "\a"; >> white-space: pre; >> } >> >> However, when Hixie was planning to add this to the HTML style sheet, >> dbaron objected to it on performance reasons: >> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25503 >> >> So, David, how bad is this? Should we go with a different solution, >> like a dedicated 'display' value just for <br> (Hixie suggested >> "display: newline;" in the linked bug). > > The HTML spec has had `display: newline` in its CSS section for quite > a while. Wouldn't it be better to just have the 'display-box: contents' version, but let the UA lie about it and optimize it into whatever it needs to, rather than create a whole new display value just for that? Or are we concerned that authors are going to use a duplicate of that UA style sheet rule for other things when they need a line break? They could still do so if they wanted, even if there was a 'newline' value too. > In addition, it's using `display: break-opportunity` to > explain the magic of <wbr>. What is the magic that can't be replicated with text properties? I'm not very familiar with this one. > > Unless the group decides that the above CSS is actually the best (and > can come up with something equivalent for <wbr>), I plan to add > "newline" and "break-opportunity" to the Display spec. Any > objections? > > ~TJ >
Received on Friday, 25 March 2016 17:02:15 UTC