spec/css3-box: edited

Author: aprowse

spec/css3-box.txt

@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ Technically, I think it's unnecessary to identify "anonymous boxes" on the basis
 
 If the definition of principal box is modified so that an inline element generates a principal box (possibly fragmented across multiple line boxes), then perhaps we can define an anonymous box to be any box which is not a principal box.  In that case, "derived box" might be a better term since such a box might not be anonymous in the sense that there may well exist a selector which can directly address some properties of that box (eg table element selector which addresses the table box, list item selector which addresses the marker box or even a ::marker pseudo-element).
 
-Editorially, it's be helpful to have a name for "fix-up boxes" introduced into the formatting structure in order to ensure that the rules of each formatting context are met.  Perhaps the term "anonymous box" could be used for this purpose?  Need to define fix-up box: perhaps say that it's a box which cannot be distinguished by its property values and characteristics from the principal box of a hypothetical document element.  Implications: column boxes and probably certain ruby boxes would *not* be anonymous, since no hypothetical document element could create them.  A misparented table cell can result in the creation of an anonymous/fix-up table wrapper box, but is it reasonable to call the table box anonymous?  Is the table box a fix-up, really, or is the wrapper box the fix up and the table box the natural consequence of the wrapper box?
+Editorially, it's be helpful to have a name for "fix-up boxes" introduced into the formatting structure in order to ensure that the rules of each formatting context are met.  Perhaps the term "anonymous box" could be used for this purpose?  Need to define fix-up box: perhaps say that it's a box which cannot be distinguished by its property values and characteristics from a box generated by some hypothetical document element.  Implications: column boxes and probably certain ruby boxes would *not* be anonymous, since no hypothetical document element could create them.  A misparented table cell can result in the creation of an anonymous/fix-up table wrapper box, but is it reasonable to call the table box anonymous?  Is the table box a fix-up, really, or is the wrapper box the fix up and the table box the natural consequence of the wrapper box?
 
 
 ====== Spec Issues ======