W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2012

Re: Orphan control in CSS

From: Matthew Wilcox <elvendil@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 13:27:05 +0000
Message-ID: <CAMCRKiJAcPuBNjTY+VCnPnqRdPL94v0GaY47-Vini7xvO7Q8DQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
At last, I have found Gmail's 'reply to all' feature! Sorry everyone,
having massive issues with this mailing list functionality.

OK, back to topic:

yes, you're right - however Orphans only applies to paged media. So is
there anything to stop the screen media implementation doing the
sensible thing and using the second definition (which is the only
definition relevent to screen)?



On 5 January 2012 13:15, Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr> wrote:
> Le 05/01/2012 14:05, Matthew Wilcox a écrit :
>
>> Yes, but it's my understanding they only apply to paged media -
>> whichis correct for Widow, but not for Orphan.
>> I am proposing we address the common use of Orphan as defined in
>> thesecond bullet point under "Orphan"
>> here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widows_and_orphans
>> Widow makes no sense in the context of screen, but orphan does.
>
>
> (Note: don’t forget to also reply to the list, not just me.)
>
> The 'orphans' CSS property is already used for the first meaning (in this
> Wikipedia page). Since what you want (the second meaning) is different, I
> think it would need a new, different property name. Maybe 'orphan-words'.
> However I’m not sure which spec/module it should go into.
>
> --
> Simon Sapin
Received on Thursday, 5 January 2012 16:21:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:48 GMT