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

Re: [css3-page] Rules for Pagination into Varying-Width Pages

From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 17:02:53 -0700
To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
CC: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Message-ID: <CAA660BE.7CE1%stearns@adobe.com>
On 9/19/11 10:14 AM, "fantasai" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
>    * Continuations of boxes on a previous page must start at the top of the
> page.
>      If this results in multiple shrinkwrapped floats side-by-side that would
> otherwise
>      be staggered (if they were not continuations), the floats' widths are
> reduced
>      in proportion to their original widths until they fit. However they are
> not
>      reduced past their min-content width; this may result in overlap between
> left and
>      right floats or side-by-side left floats overflowing the containing
> block.

I agree with performing layout on a per-page basis, with the implications of
boxes possibly changing widths across pages (or a region break).

But I'm not sure about the "top of page" rule. Is it more important to place
a continuation at the top of a page than to honor its layout constraints?
I've attached a screenshot showing fixed-width left and right floats getting
squeezed, overlapping or just staggering without the "top of page" rule. I'm
not sure I see a big advantage to either of the first two if the fixed width
was the author's intent.

Allowing continuations to use normal layout without a top-of-page rule seems
easier to implement and easier to explain. I think in most intentional
situations the continuations will naturally fit at the top of the page
anyway. Can we leave out this rule?



Received on Tuesday, 27 September 2011 00:03:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 February 2015 12:34:57 UTC