W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2013

Re: [css3-page] 6.3 ++

From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 08:58:48 +0100
Message-ID: <51248238.40103@kozea.fr>
To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
CC: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Le 20/02/2013 07:26, Håkon Wium Lie a écrit :
> First, section 6.3 still seems complicated. I think the underlying
> model is quite simple and I've sketched a 6.3-replacement here:
>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Aug/0155.html
> Which seems easier to read and still has the required specificity?

Well, I’ve been going through multiple revisions of this algorithm on 
www-style for more than a year now, and have requested feedback numerous 
times. The current version is close to what both PrinceXML and 
AntennaHouse implement, based on feedback from Micheal Day and Murakami-san.

Also, the linked proposal seems to specify high level goals but not the 
actual behavior. Is there something more specific in the ED’s algorithm 
you would like to change?

> Second, I described a use case here:
>    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Aug/0152.html
> Basically, I'd like to make sure that 'width' is honored on margin
> boxes, even when neighboring boxes have no content. I can't quite
> determine if this is supported in the current section 6.3.

Yes, the current algorithm does that. Basically:

* Any non-auto value is used unchanged
* Auto margins are always zero
* The rest of the algorithm picks a values for auto widths in various cases.

> Third, I'd like to see comma-separated page selectors:
>    @page foo, bar {
>      @bottom-right: {
>        content: counter(page);
>      }
>    }

Yes, we resolved to do that on the 2013-01-30 conf call. It was actually 
already described in prose but not in the grammar. I clarified the prose 
and updated the grammar.

> I suggest removing the at-risk comment


> I also suggest adding and example

Filed an issue on this: https://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/305

Same overall story for multiples pseudo-classes in the same selector:

@page :blank:left

> Fourth, the draft refers to 'page-break-before'/'page-break-after'. I
> suggest referring to 'break-before'/'break-after' instead


> Fifth, returning to 6.3: where is 'outer width' defined?

CSS 2.1 defines "outer edge", and sometimes uses "outer width" as short 
for width of the outer edge.


We could add a link if you think it helps.

> Sixth, I think the draft should say something about abspos elements:
> which page is the containg block -- the first or the natural page?

I don’t know. Relationships between abspos/fixed pos and fragmentation 
(including pagination) are very fuzzy for me. I don’t know how it’s 
supposed to work or where it’s supposed to be defined.

Simon Sapin
Received on Wednesday, 20 February 2013 07:59:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:08 UTC