- From: Florian Rivoal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 07:21:07 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Not clipping in these cases makes sense to me as well. Both the TR wording and the ED wording are problematic though, as neither of them defines the behavior for all cases. So, what are we after? 1 - in flow 2 - floated 3 - abspos / fixpos 4 - relpos / transforms 5 - ... someting else? As discussed above, I seems that we have a reasonably good justification for 3 to not be clipped, as there are valid use cases that depend on that. For the rest, I am less sure about use cases, as overflow seems more of an error case to me. In that case, clipping **will** lead to unreadable content, while overflow **may** do so, if the overflowing content overlaps with something. Neither seem great, but the later seem better. On top of that, maybe one day we'll have a pseudo element selector for the column box, and authors will be able to change the value of the `overflow` property on it. With that in mind, it would be preferable that the behavior we pick today can be explained in terms of values of that property. “Always clip” can, and so does always “overflow”, but having a few things clip while others do not sound harder to retrofit. => I think we should let things overflow without clipping in all cases. (Note: all that is independent of things that overflow in the block direction in a way that triggers fragmentation, as discussed in [the next section of the spec](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-multicol/#pagination-and-overflow-outside-multicol). That's fully governed by [css-break](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-break/). We're only discussing the things that overflow without causing fragmentation) -- GitHub Notification of comment by frivoal Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/314#issuecomment-263801631 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 30 November 2016 07:21:14 UTC