{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Conversation
Owner
Contributor
Author
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.


Fix #2732 plus more side effects (hopefully all good).
The three notable changes are:
p,m,bdon't getvattachanymore. This is a no-brainer: thevattachis already on theinline-blockfor those column types (in fact, you had already fixed the core issue, the only remaining problem was the extra@vattach).baseline-source, which behaves like TeX; this also produces better alignment between tags and text in lists. This should be low risk. I am only worried by MathML, because some CSS stops working there.vertical-align:baselineinstead ofmiddle. This is dangerous! I had to revert the change in equation cells, because tags are pretty much hard-coded toltx_align_middle. I believe that all other<table>s are generated fromtabular,\halign, and other TeX constructs for which the baseline alignment is correct, so in theory this is all fine.I checked that the result works in all three main browsers (Chrome, Safari, Firefox). Firefox does not implement
baseline-source, so it falls back to the less precisevertical-align:top.Note: while the CSS spec says authors should prefer the shorthand
vertical-align: first baseline, Chrome only supports the longhandbaseline-source. That's why I used@supports.