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?

Thanks,

Alan



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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:44 GMT