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

[css3-page] comments on last ED

From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 11:19:50 +0100
Message-ID: <5124A346.4070504@disruptive-innovations.com>
To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Here are some comments on the latest css3-page ED:

   Honestly, I have a strong concern about the 16 page-margin
   boxes. When I try to print from a browser on a office printer,
   here's what I get:


   it allows me to specify the usual six page-margin boxes but not the
   10 extras. Furthermore, the specification does not say how the
   settings in that dialog set/conflict/collide/override the ones in
   the stylesheets attached to the printed document. I think that is a

   The 16 boxes are a mix of flows, flexing, tables and grids. We have
   now better on the radar in the CSS WG. I understand Paged Media 3
   has to be published because there are already implementations in the
   wild, but this is sooooo 2002...

   The prose says in section 5.1 that "margin at-rules may be
   interleaved with the declarations in the page context". I would
   prefer such a wording "An @page rule can also contain other
   at-rules, interleaved between declarations. The current
   specification only allows margin at-rules inside @page for the time

   I think a definition for blank pages is missing: if an element is a
   running element (then rendered inside a page-margin box) triggering
   a page-break before and after, is it a blank page?

   Section 5.1 does not say that @page rules can happen anywhere in a
   stylesheet, w/o restrictions like the ones existing for @import.

   Section 5.1 should establish a link between 'page name' in second
   paragraph and section 9.1 (the 'page' property').

   Page margin boxes names are not rtl-compliant. Since they use left
   and right, a UA will have to look at the system's locale and the
   document's language to apply the print settings discussed above.

   GRAMMAR: there is a problem in the 'page-body' production. It allows
   the following:

     @page {
       property: value
       @top-left { property value }

   where the first declaration in @page does not end with a ; making the
   whole thing usually invalid...

   Case-sensitivity of page names not mentioned in section 5, only in
   section 9.1, not linked from section 5.

   Section 6.1 says "(margin at-rules) should come after any
   declarations in the page context as legacy clients may not handle
   declarations after margin at-rules correctly" BUT grammar in section
   5.3 clearly allows a declaration AFTER a margin at-rule. This is

   Not sure the page and page counters' definition in section 7.1
   should not belong to the GCPM spec.

   I have implementation concerns about the last paragraph before issue
   2 "If a size property declaration is qualified...". The MQ can come
   not from inside the stylesheet but also from a media attribute in
   the markup, making it a bit difficult for a css parser to reach it.

   'spilling' is totally undefined in section 8.2 item 4.

   section 8.3 second item says "in the upper left corner". Including
   for rtl documents?

   Section 9.1 item 2 of the list following example 28 uses "iff". I
   have no idea if this is a typo or means "if and only if". If the
   latter, then the use of the abbreviation here is a mistake
   potentially harmful to non natively english readers.

   What happens with

     div { page: foo; }
     span.blah { page: bar; }

     <div>foo<span class="blah">bar</span>foo</div>

   ? Three pages?
   Should the page property be limited to block-level boxes?

   Section 7 and appendix A don't list the same properties. For
   instance bidi properties are in appendix A for page boxes and not in
   section 7. One of the two should probably go.

Received on Wednesday, 20 February 2013 10:20:20 UTC

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