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

Re: [CSS3-GCPM] Three questions regarding footnotes

From: Giovanni Campagna <scampa.giovanni@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:03:31 +0100
Message-ID: <65307430903180603l4b1e2047sd59f1aaca9b0b79d@mail.gmail.com>
To: thomas <thomas.bsd@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
2009/3/17 thomas <thomas.bsd@gmail.com>:
> 2009/3/17 Giovanni Campagna <scampa.giovanni@gmail.com>:
>> 2009/3/17 thomas <thomas.bsd@gmail.com>:
>>> 1) It does not seem possible to have two footnote areas at the bottom
>>> of the page (in the example, one for alphabetic footnotes, one for
>>> numbered footnotes).
>> Actually you may, just you need some more work (you need two elements,
>> floated to footnote area, each one receiving data from named flows). A
>> better solution would be
>> @footnote <ident> {
>> }
>> float: footnote(<ident>);
>> (or move-to: or position: or position-flow:)
> I missed the possibility of having multiple named footnote areas.  The
> draft mention always "*the* footnote area".  By the way, how do you
> specify which footnote area is above the other one?  The draft states
> that "If figures and footnotes [with 'float:bottom page]' are on the
> same page, the footnotes will appear below the figures as they are
> floated to the bottom before the figures."  But is there any rule
> regarding multiple footnote areas?

Currently there's only one @footnote area. Mine was a proposal:
@page {
@footnote alpha { ... }
@footnote oth { ... }
For what concerns rendering order, it seems simple to me to use rule
order. In this case alpha notes would be before oth notes.

>>> 2) It does not seem possible to put several footnote references in a
>>> single paragraph (as it is the case, in the example, for the
>>> alphabetic footnote references).
>> Why not? You just need to display:inline the appropriate ::footnote
>> pseudo-element
> Which "::footnote pseudo-element"?  The draft mentions only
> "::footnote-call" and "::footnote-marker" (in this version:
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-gcpm/ ).  Moreover, this is not that
> simple, because you certainly want something to separate the
> footnotes, i.e. an em dash:
> [1] foo — [2] bar — [3] — baz

I'm sure there was, but actually you're right. In theory, you should
be able to specify display:inline directly on the element, since all
the element boxes are treated as discendants of the footnote area, so
it just creates an inline box inside the footnote area (same as
putting a text node in the real dom).

Unfortunately, the computed value of display is either block or table,
because the element is floated. This is one of the reasons I once
proposed using a new property instead of float (compare to
css3-content and the move-to: property)

Secondly, an approach to the em-dash (or general separator) problem
could be to extend the "pending" / "to" functional notations for the
content: property to accept also a string, placed between elements in
the named flow.
This means that either "float:footnote" is generalized to be a
shorthand for "float:to(footnote)" with some auto values (same as
"content:footnote" in css3-content) or you need some more syntax for
separated footnotes.

> [...]
> It was indeed a typo.  Thanks for the explanation.
> Thomas

Received on Wednesday, 18 March 2009 13:04:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:25 UTC