On Tue, 2002-05-07 at 03:56, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
> > >From a practical viewpoint it makes sense to wrap the block in an inline
> > area with the traits and treat the block normally in layout terms but it
> > still feels uncomfortable. It also introduces a whole lot of other
> > questions about line height, padding etc.
> >
> The use of "line-height" for inlines is as a synonym for "height"; one _can_
> use "height" but only for replaced inline-level FOs. So for an original
> "inline", say, we'd ignore a "height" but use "line-height" instead, which
> more often than not is just going to inherit from the block containing it. I
> think this is pretty straightforward.
> I don't know if this is what you were getting at, though. Because I figure
> you're on top of this already.

I was referring to the line-stacking-strategy. If it is font-height then
"It has the same block-progression dimension for each line-area child of
a block-area."

This means that if we embedd the block within a line area then the line
is still the same height as other lines. So even if the block is big
enough to fill a page it will be placed in a line area that has the same
height as as other lines with only text.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to