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

Re: [css3-multicol] new editor's draft

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 16:10:39 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTinRpVF3ci+sirnRHGf0uO=_idfi7CMa=hYEj1oX@mail.gmail.com>
To: shelby@coolpage.com
Cc: "Håkon Wium Lie" <howcome@opera.com>, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>, www-style@w3.org
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Shelby Moore <shelby@coolpage.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Shelby Moore <shelby@coolpage.com> wrote:
>>> Regardless of how you interpret the spec above for 'column-span', it can
>>> not go underneath, because the prior columns have already been
>>> 'break-after'. The spec does not allow us to put anything in the columns
>>> after a column break.  Since when did a column break become not a column
>>> break?
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-multicol/#column-breaks
>>>
>>> If a designer says to break the column, they mean it-- nothing must
>>> follow
>>> in that column.
>>
>> The suggestion here is essentially to create a new column row in this
>> circumstance, similar to what you'd get with the "column-overflow:
>> block" proposal we talked about earlier.
>
> I thought of that too, but Håkon did not show any column-gap or what ever
> we intend to put between rows of columns.

To be fair, that's likely because *I* didn't put a column-row-gap in
my ascii examples, because I thought it might obscure what I was
trying to illustrate.  Regardless, I'm pretty certain this is exactly
what Hakon is talking about.


> And you can't put it underneath in the current spec, because all overflow
> must go in the inline direction.  See section 8.2.

Yes, this would require a change to the spec.

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 26 October 2010 23:11:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:33 GMT