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

[page][gcpm] should a named page start on a new page?

From: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:12:50 +0200
Message-ID: <18632.18.114085.691573@opera.com>
To: www-style@w3.org

The CSS WG started discussing the 'page' property today. 

Here are the messages with use cases:

Use cases 1, 2, 3:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Aug/0136.html

Use case 4:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Aug/0152.html

The current proposal is written up here:

  http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-gcpm/Overview.html#page-lists

The four examples in the editor's draft correspond to the use cases.

As the proposal stands, a non-auto value on 'page' will always cause a
page break before the element. This is a change from CSS2 where two
elements that have the same non-auto value on 'page' would end up on
the same page if there is room.

Here is an example to illustrate why the change is beneficial.
Consider this markup:

  <div>...</div>
  <div>...</div>

combined with this style sheet:

   div { page: foo }
   @page foo { ... }
   @page foo:first { ... }

Let's assume that a page break is not generated and that the second
element starts on the page where the first element ends. If so, will
that page be a :first page? If the anwser is yes, the formatter may
have to go back and change the margins/headers/footers of a page that
has already been (partially) laid out. If not, :first doesn't live up
to its promises.

I think adding a page break there is simpler, cleaner and I don't
think it affects many pages. 

-h&kon
              Håkon Wium Lie                          CTO °þe®ª
howcome@opera.com                  http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Wednesday, 10 September 2008 17:13:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:12 GMT