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

RE: [css-regions][css-break] Nested & grouped regions breaking rules

From: Mihai Balan <mibalan@adobe.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 14:10:01 +0100
To: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
CC: "fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "Rossen.Atanassov@microsoft.com" <rossen.atanassov@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <32E5AE8565CC6142BA0AAFA5A95697E04D24038F69@eurmbx01.eur.adobe.com>
Since we’re just throwing ideas at a wall here, wouldn’t it be simpler to just allow the breaking properties to be specified inside @region { } region styling blocks?

My .02€,
m

Mihai Balan | Quality Engineer @ Web Engine team |  mibalan@adobe.com<mailto:mibalan@adobe.com> | +4-031.413.3653 / x83653 | Adobe Systems Romania

From: François REMY [mailto:francois.remy.dev@outlook.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 6:05 AM
To: Mihai Balan; www-style@w3.org
Cc: fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net; Rossen.Atanassov@microsoft.com
Subject: RE: [css-regions][css-break] Nested & grouped regions breaking rules

> I might be missing something, but I think the use-case you're trying to achieve can be done by setting `break-avoid: region` on the inner regions themselves while using whatever values for the break properties on the actual content being flown through these inner regions.

Interesting. I'm not entirely convinced this does indeed solve all the use cases (in fact, I'm almost sure of the contrary), but I can definitely see how it can help to solve some. It still suffer from the "all-regions-are-treated-the-same" issue, but in another way which may actually make sense in a bunch of cases.

Given this is L2+ stuff anyway, I'm inclined to say that this solution and Alan's JS-based workaround are worth looking at, and we can get back to this specific issue whenever users actually face real-life issues instead of basing too much work on the theoretical ones I presented here. This is actually the conclusion I reached with Alan when we were discussing this, for what it is worth.
Received on Thursday, 25 July 2013 13:11:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 25 July 2013 13:11:12 UTC