Subject:
|
Re: BFC revisited
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:44:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
384 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote:
> There was never agreement on what the BFC standard should be. So there
> aren't very many parts that follow it in any way.
>
> I do have a set of primitives that are BFC-compliant. I didn't straighten
> out all the primitives, but I did a number of them. I can email them to
> you, if you want.
I would appreciate that.
-Gary
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: BFC revisited
|
| (...) I double-checked the primitives I had, to make sure they were OK. I zipped them up, and posted them on my Geocities site. You can grab a copy from (URL). Steve (23 years ago, 20-Aug-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: BFC revisited
|
| There was never agreement on what the BFC standard should be. So there aren't very many parts that follow it in any way. I do have a set of primitives that are BFC-compliant. I didn't straighten out all the primitives, but I did a number of them. I (...) (23 years ago, 17-Aug-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
