[whatwg] Alignment of empty buttons
ian at hixie.ch
Fri Nov 22 15:00:35 PST 2013
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 9/5/13 4:47 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > In what sense?
> In the sense that if its computed display is "block" but its layout
> behavior is not that of a non-replaced block (CSS 2.1 section 10.3.3 and
> so forth), then it's clearly a replaced element with layout behavior
> defined by something other than CSS.
Hm, it's true that <button>s do seem exceedingly eager to remain
inline-block-esque even when set to more block-like display types.
> > The definition of "replaced element" here:
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/conform.html#replaced-element
> > ...doesn't seem to apply to <button>. The rendering of <button> is
> > very much in CSS' scope, no?
> Sure doesn't seem to be, since no UA actually renders <button
> style="display: block"> the way a CSS block renders; they do something
> totally different which is presumably covered by some other spec (e.g.
The definition above talks only about the contents of the element, not
the element itself, except that the element may have intrinsic dimensions.
In the case of <button>, the contents are very much rendered by CSS. It's
the element itself that defies CSS rules.
So it's something, but not a replaced element.
It does respond to 'display', just not as you'd expect. For example,
setting it to display:table doesn't make it a table on the inside:
Setting it to 'table-row' doesn't make it a row on the outside:
Setting it to 'display:block' does seem to make a difference, though:
Browsers (I mainly tested Gecko and WebKit) are remarkably interoperable
I've filed a bug to track this:
If anyone has any suggestions on how to spec this, I'm eager to here
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg