W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2008

RE: [css3-page] Page area changes within a document

From: Grant, Melinda <melinda.grant@hp.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 00:47:38 +0000
To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <763AE400FE923441B74861D534DF254950FC20D3F7@GVW0433EXB.americas.hpqcorp.net>

Alex said:
> Melinda said:
> I propose to add the following (probably in a new sub-section 4.4):
>        "Each page in turn is laid out as if the initial containing block were the same size as its page area."

> CSS 2.1 has this text in 13.2.2:
> “Margin declarations on left, right, and first pages may result in different page area <http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/page.html#page-area>  widths. To simplify implementations, user agents
> may use a single page area width on left, right, and first pages. In this case, the page area width of the first page
> should be used. “

> That leaves layout across different page sizes intentionally undefined. We’ll not change that for 2.1, right?

Right.

> - Changing an element’s width on different pages may work for text flow, but it definitely doesn’t work for a table.

Yes, we should except tables.  (Although I don't necessarily see that it 'definitely doesn't work', I agree it could be really ugly. ;-) There may be other things we want to call out as undefined as well.)

> - An image with width:50% split across pages really shouldn’t have different scale on different pages

This example as I understand it doesn't make sense to me.  I think we have general agreement that content to the left or right of the page box is omitted when printing; at least the spec allows it to be discarded. And I believe we recently agreed to add verbiage to 13.3.5 to the effect that breaking inside images is to be avoided.  There are aberrant cases with printing images though --  say the image height is 110% of page height. Even with a page break before, the image will never fit a page.  In those cases, we don't spec the behavior. I certainly agree that it's not important that the remainder of the image be rescaled to the new page area size.

> I think it is still fine to have examples of content that adapts to variable page width but it should remain optional.
What do you think we should mandate?  (It's not just the variable width that has implications: height changes needs to be taken into account too.)  Or are you suggesting we leave it as it is for css2.1 in css3 as well?  I think that would be unfortunate.

[I note the f2f irc log includes a discussion where use cases for this were felt to be very rare or unusual. Use cases I think we should be sure to enable include a first page with different styling (margins, borders, etc.) and, similarly, different styling for right and left pages. For instance, I might want an extra-wide left margin on the first page of my document.  I might want to put a wide right border with a nice border image on every right page...]

Best wishes,

Melinda
Received on Thursday, 23 October 2008 00:49:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:15 GMT