[css-display][css-ruby] Inlinification Considerations #1390
Labels
Closed Accepted as Obvious Bugfix
Commenter Satisfied
Commenter has indicated satisfaction with the resolution / edits.
css-display-3
Current Work
css-ruby-1
Current Work
i18n-tracker
Group bringing to attention of Internationalization, or tracked by i18n but not needing response.
Tracked in DoC
Comments
|
I think anonymous box fixup is probably fine here, so closing the issue. |
tabatkins
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 5, 2017
triple-underscore
added a commit
to triple-underscore/triple-underscore.github.io
that referenced
this issue
Jul 6, 2017
Commits on Jul 6, 2017 Note that 'display: contents' does not affect property inheritance. Fixes w3c/csswg-drafts#1473 w3c/csswg-drafts@356b3296d5b20e00bedbfa8d1db59 d005a73bfc9 Normatively define what was in the previous note: that run-in fixup occurs before first line determination. w3c/csswg-drafts@37c01a4ef94aec7c352c3dc7c5cfc 31f8898ed4d Move computed value bullet before box generation bullet. w3c/csswg-drafts@5d10db8d8665f52994530304f2ddc 88236d37ccb Clarify that run-in fixup occurs before block/inline fixup. w3c/csswg-drafts@6f6913e20851f50ad81ca3cb43a49 9c01e8b2186 Expand out informal definitions of BFC. Also fixes w3c/csswg-drafts#1471 . w3c/csswg-drafts@388b1fb3bfa7dbe2ed112581322d2 a10787c9121 Refer to 'flow layout' directly, rather than just mentioning the types of boxes that flow layout can produce. Fixes w3c/csswg-drafts#1470 . w3c/csswg-drafts@09212af80e10e4e3e57965bb27b2d e3fdcd86e06 Make the run-in recursion explicit, so it's clear the second step doesn't recurse. Fixes w3c/csswg-drafts#1460 . w3c/csswg-drafts@c9f1bb16d0e5077b9bca7027a7d72 52eeff5abf1 Be a little looser about what counts as abspos, because css-lists defines as out-of-flow. Fixes w3c/csswg-drafts#1458 w3c/csswg-drafts@f7ff60660c3b5e1b31000ffa0f729 ba04f13a2f8 Remove the w3c/csswg-drafts#1390 inline issue. w3c/csswg-drafts@4514b3e7f2f0aa8ef95a84c107fb9 90fc2def209 Add note about the two categories of box-tree fixup, and their relative ordering. Fixes w3c/csswg-drafts#1355 . w3c/csswg-drafts@f5b79e99bb8fc9ebea4ed956ed342 0bc69b90786 Apply diff, per resolution. Fixes w3c/csswg-drafts#1118 . w3c/csswg-drafts@dbb7042481d132efcb6869ecbdf44 f338d8ad944
|
Actually, it's not entirely clear what happens when table upwards fixup and ruby downards fixup occurs, so I added a clarification in ec80a76 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Inlinification (such as what happens to the block-level contents of a run-in or ruby annotation) currently doesn't affect the display of layout-internal types like
table-row: for these boxes no computed valuedisplayalteration happens, and anonymous box fixup will wrap them accordingly. Blockification instead converts the display value toblock(so no anonymous box fixup happens, and also any further structure inside it is disrupted by the conversion toblock). Is there a reason to do one vs the other here?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: