I thought the current FB behavior with regards to <a> tags made perfect sense, up until I read the bug report you link to. From a CSS perspective, the current behavior is correct, it seems to me, as <a> is by default a display:inline tag (like <span>). I kind of get why some would be confused by this, but all the same, this isn't something I learned from the spec. I actually believe I learned it from FB or Dom inspector, saw the short <a> with a big <img> inside and said to myself "well, that looks funny... but, say, that's what it would look like if it was a <span>..."
If someone had asked me if this was strange behavior, I would not think so, but I can now see how someone could come to that conclusion. That said, I think it would *also* be useful to know the effective area of the <a> contents.... though if I had a choice between that and showing me the correct CSS behavior, I'll take the latter... accuracy should be FB's priority. On Nov 30, 1:07 pm, John J Barton <[email protected]> wrote: > I learned a bit about <a> tags today, they inspect like span tags, not > like a container > thing:http://blog.getfirebug.com/2009/11/30/html-links-are-like-span-tags/ > jjb -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en.
