W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > December 2010

Re: page-breaks-101 probably invalid

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2010 13:32:52 -0800
Message-ID: <4CFEA804.2020302@inkedblade.net>
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
CC: public-css-testsuite@w3.org
On 12/02/2010 10:47 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
> I think this test:
> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/page-breaks-101.htm
> is probably invalid.
>
> While the behavior it suggests seems desirable to me, I don't think
> the behavior is what the spec says to do.  As far as I can tell, the
> rules in the "Allowed page breaks" section do not allow any breaks
> after the P, only before it, since they only allow breaking in
> margins that are *between* block boxes, not between the last child
> block of a block and its parent block.  The rules in that section
> only allow ignoring a margin when it was broken across.

Fixed.
http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/hp/submitted/css2.1/page/page-breaks-101.xht

> As far as I can tell, the correct layout according to the spec is
> probably to have two pages, with the P on the *second* page, and the
> bottom border of the div overflowing past the bottom of the second
> page and thus invisible.  (I don't think that's a particularly
> desirable result, though.)

I agree that clipping the border might not be a desireable result,
but I think forcing a page break at the paragraph instead of at the
last margin before the border is intended. It pushes the last line
of a bordered box to the next page so that you don't get stray borders
floating around the next page.

~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 7 December 2010 21:33:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 7 December 2010 21:33:40 GMT