Repository navigation
[css-display] Notation proposal: 'flow container' #1265
Description
The term "block container" is misleading. CSS 2.1 defines it as
A block container box either contains only block-level boxes or establishes an inline formatting context and thus contains only inline-level boxes.
However, the name seems to suggest that it can only contain block-level boxes. Probably, that's why CSS Display wrongly (#1185) defines it as
A box whose contents participate in a block formatting context.
So maybe the notation should change. Something like
- flow container: either a block container or an inline formatting context root.
- block container: a box whose contents participate in a block formatting context. [...]
- inline formatting context root: box that establishes a new inline formatting context for its contents.
- block box: a block-level box that is also a flow container.
<display-inside>: flow: If its outer display [...]. Otherwise it generates a flow container box. [...] It either establishes a new block or inline formatting context for its contents, or integrates its contents into its parent formatting context.<display-inside>: flow-root: The element generates a flow container box [...]. It always establishes a new block formatting context for its contents.
This would be more consistent with the flow and flow-root keywords.
Activity
tabatkins commentedon May 15, 2017
We agree that "flow container" would probably have been a better term to use originally, but at this point "block container" is used reasonably widely across CSS specs, so we probably shouldn't change it.
It's also a little more familiar for authors to link up "X container" to "display: X", which holds with "block container", but not "flow container" (because "display: X flow" can use either inline or block for the X).
Loirooriol commentedon May 16, 2017
Yes, I also noticed that "flow container" wouldn't be consistent with
display: block. I was thinking about some alternative proposal about requiring the contents of a block container to always be block-level (as the name implies), wrapping sequences of inline-levels inside a block-level inline container, which would be what establishes the inline formatting context. But this would be a new kind of box, and even only allowing it for anonymous ones would have its own problems, so maybe it's better as it is now.gitspeaks commentedon Nov 15, 2024
Personally, I find the opposite to be true. The connection implied by "X container" to "display: X" in this case is actually quite confusing—it trips me up, especially when an inline-block element is designated as a block container. Using the term "Flow Container" feels more intuitive, as it suggests a broader category of element display designations which include
list-itemwithout implying a specific designation.