- From: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 22:56:17 +0100
- To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@exchange.microsoft.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Alex Mogilevsky wrote, on December 11, 2007:
> > I'm not quite convinced that we need separate properties for
> > column breaking. If the use case is forcing a column break, then
> > I think adding keywords to page-break-before and page-break-after
> > should be sufficient.
> I agree. I would be much easier to both understand and implement if
> there was only one set of properties controlling breaks. And
> column-break that is a page-break at the same time is a case that
> is solvable but definitely not intuitive.
>
> There is only one column-break property that is not included in page-breaks:
>
> column-break:always
>
> what if instead we use
>
> page-break:column
>
> That would cover all use cases, wouldn't it?
I assume you mean:
page-break-before: column;
page-break-after: column;
Yes, I think it would cover all the use cases. It still doesn't look
right, though -- a page and a column are two different things and
setting column breaks on page properties makes me somewhat nervous.
At the same time, I'm all for keeping the number of properties down.
Hmm.
-h&kon
Håkon Wium Lie CTO °þe®ª
howcome@opera.com http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Sunday, 22 February 2009 21:57:13 UTC