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

Håkon Wium Lie wrote:
> 
> The solution is neat, but I don't like the overloading; the presence
> of a pseudo-class style rule should not add page breaks. 

Agreed.

> I understand your resistance. I think there are two simpler option
> that preserves the behavior from CSS2:
> 
> 1) We can say that foo:first doens't create a page break, but if there
> is an explicit page break there alsory, foo:first will apply.
> 
> 2) We remove foo:first altogether and use page lists instead.

I have a preference for #1.

My concern with 'page-group' is that it's a mode-switching property,
which is something we should avoid for cascading reasons if possible.

~fantasai