W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2010

Re: [css3-multicol] overflow and paging?

From: Shelby Moore <shelby@coolpage.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 05:52:57 -0400
Message-ID: <7613516c5063adcaccd7617b71fcf0dc.squirrel@sm.webmail.pair.com>
To: shelby@coolpage.com
Cc: "Brad Kemper" <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "David Storey" <dstorey@opera.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Note this thread just forked in an earlier discussion, and I think I made
perhaps a more coherent and concise summary there:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Oct/0280.html


>> On Oct 14, 2010, at 11:33 AM, "Shelby Moore" <shelby@coolpage.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In this case, wouldn't it be much more predictable if multi-col
>>> containers
>>> always limit their column height to any blocking constraint of their
>>> outer
>>> containers, up to but not including the viewport or frame?
>>
>> No, because that is not how overflow and height normally interact.
>
>
> Incorrect.
>
> I am not proposing the the flowed content height be limited, but rather
> only the "column row height".
>
> Realize that the number of rows of columns will still be allowed to flow
> in the block direction in compliance with the fact that the multi-col
> element is "height:auto" (aka block unconstrained).
>
> The only thing that my proposed "column-height:constrain" as the default
> affects is the row height of the columns, not the actual height of the
> overflow.
>
> I realize that is very confusing if only expressed in words.

[snip]
Received on Friday, 15 October 2010 09:53:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:32 GMT