[css-display] Add 'display:contents list-item' ?

[MatsPalmgren]

https://drafts.csswg.org/css-display/#propdef-display
Given that a display:contents element can generate ::before/::after boxes, it seems reasonable that it should also be able to generate a ::marker box. The box would be forced to be list-style-position:inside, just like for display:inline list-item.

[tabatkins]

I mean, it could. But does it need to?

[astearns]

@tabatkins one of the use cases you pointed to for subgrid last week was the table of contents for specs. While that specific case doesn't use list markers I can definitely imagine a TOC situation that did. Wouldn't you expect the display:contents workaround to work pretty much the same as subgrid in that case?

[tabatkins]

Agenda+ to confirm that we're okay closing WONTFIX, just due to lack of use-case.

There's nothing theoretically wrong with this, it's just extra complexity without justification so far.

[css-meeting-bot]

The CSS Working Group just discussed display: contents list-item, and agreed to the following:

• RESOLVED: close wontfix for now

The full IRC log of that discussion

<fantasai> Topic: display: contents list-item
<fantasai> github: https://github.com//issues/4022
<fantasai> astearns: Proposal is close wontfix?
<fantasai> TabAtkins: brought up that there's nothing theoretically wrong with 'display: contents list-item' which would generate a ::marker
<fantasai> TabAtkins: Currently the grammar doesn't allow combining these two
<fantasai> TabAtkins: My objection to this is just that we don't have any particularly strong reason to do so
<fantasai> TabAtkins: but there's nothing wrong with it
<fantasai> TabAtkins: so suggesting close no change
<fantasai> TabAtkins: but no objection to making it possible if someone thinks this is a useful thing that we should allow
<fantasai> astearns: My case in the comments is completely theoretically
<fantasai> TabAtkins: I can see it, but I think it's one more thing that we don't necessarily need
<fantasai> emilio: seems like one more case that we should avoid, so ok with no change
<fantasai> astearns: Any objections to no change?
<fantasai> RESOLVED: close wontfix
<emilio> s/case that we should/edge case we should
<fantasai> astearns: If Mats feels strongly, he could reopen it