W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2011

Re: [css3-regions] OM for region content overflow

From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 19:08:02 -0700
To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>, Vincent Hardy <vhardy@adobe.com>, W3C style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C9F9C992.528B%stearns@adobe.com>
On 5/18/11 6:45 PM, "Alex Mogilevsky" <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote:

>  From: Vincent Hardy [mailto:vhardy@adobe.com]
>  Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 6:33 PM
>  
>  I liked the proposal you had in a previous email for the property name:
>  
>  Element.contentOverflow
>  
>  For the property values, I prefer a mix of what you propose:
>  
>  overflow | fit | empty
>  
>  I am not sure we need the 'not-a-region' value because in case of non-
>  region element, we could specify that the contentOverflow value is 'fit'.
> 
> I think the property really need to have "region" in the name. Otherwise it
> may be expected to return overflow status on regular elements, which it is not
> designed to do...
> 
> I have mixed feelings on 'not-a-region'. It is true that regular element can
> always say 'fit' but it is useless and some kind of "not applicable" would
> make more sense... But it is still useless...
> 
> Maybe
> 
> Element.regionContentOverflow = overflow | fit | empty
> 
> Or
> 
> Element.regionOverflow = overflow | fit | empty
> 
> ?

What if you had a named flow that contained one large element (and nothing
else), and the chain of regions associated with that named flow had a small
region followed by a large region. The large element would not fit in the
first region, but does fit in the second. Could the first region be "empty"
and the second region be "fit"? Do we need another value for "skipped"?
Received on Thursday, 19 May 2011 02:08:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:40 GMT