W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2009

Re: [css3-multicol] Ambiguous term "constrained" for column-fill

From: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 00:46:48 +0200
Message-ID: <18990.58968.174207.940366@opera.com>
To: robert@ocallahan.org
Cc: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Also sprach Robert O'Callahan:

 > >  In continuous media, this property will only be consulted if the
 > >   column height is set to be longer than it would naturally be from
 > >  its content. Otherwise, columns will automatically be balanced.
 > 
 > 
 > If this is the intent, I think a better name would be "column-overflow".

But it's not overflow, it's more like "underflow". That is, the issue
only arises when there's more real-estate than there is content to
fill it. In these cases one must decide whether one (a) fills in the
block direction, or (b) fills in the text direction.

 > Your text is still a bit vague, though. Do you mean that UAs should compute
 > the height of the columns' content with balancing, and if that's greater
 > than the height of the columns element, then we consult
 > column-fill/column-overflow? I don't really like that behaviour; calculating
 > balance heights can be expensive, where "column-fill:auto" can be much
 > cheaper, and it would be good to be able to avoid the expensive stuff if
 > we're just going to fall back to the simple thing.

Good point. 

Do you have a suggested text?

-h&kon
              Håkon Wium Lie                          CTO °þe®ª
howcome@opera.com                  http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Tuesday, 9 June 2009 22:47:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:18 GMT