Re:The Anti-hero of CSS Layout – “display:table”
by gsnedders on Monday October 27, 2014 @01:09PM
(#8516716)
Even earlier, display: table was part of the original CSS Level 2 which became a REC in 1998 — twelve years before "responsive design" came into being. It largely followed what had been added to HTML 3.2 in January 1997 — based on what most browsers (with Netscape first) in 1996.
There's also a lot of unwillingness to do much around display: table — it remains largely unspecified (mostly because we basically know web compatibility requires you to do what IE6 does — and nobody knows quite what that is, and MS people have struggled to get permission to disclose the detail).
Re:The Anti-hero of CSS Layout – “display:table”
by yuhong on Tuesday October 28, 2014 @12:42AM
(#8519567)
At least it was mostly copied from Netscape, and source for that is available as Mozilla Classic (from the cancelled Mariner project). I used it to figure out where HTML legacy color parsing come from.
Re:The Anti-hero of CSS Layout – “display:table”
by gsnedders on Tuesday October 28, 2014 @01:57PM
(#8522368)
Sadly, we know that what web compat relies on isn't quite what NN4(-ish) does, so the mere fact that that is available doesn't really help too much. :(
Re:The Anti-hero of CSS Layout – “display:table”
by yuhong on Tuesday October 28, 2014 @02:06PM
(#8522442)
Actually, the same thing is true for HTML legacy color parsing too, but the only difference there is a few lines of code. I think it is these lines that was added (from http://mxr.mozilla.org/classic/source/lib/layout/layimage.c#...):
if (bytes_per_val > 4)
{
bytes_per_val = 4;
}
I'm not sure what you mean by "finally release." The display: table property was part of the CSS 2.1, which became a Candidate Recommendation in 2004 and an official Recommendation in 2011. It also works perfectly in IE8, which was released in 2009.
The term "Responsive Design," on the other hand, wasn't even coined until 2010, and didn't really become mainstream for another 2-3 years.
There were a couple of years when working with display: table was perfectly reasonable and the "Responsive Design" trend hadn't yet hit the tipping point.
I dislike overdone/late W3C processes as much as anyone, but this isn't a good example of that.