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

Re: [css3-break] Limiting break propagation to the fragmented flow

From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 06:36:20 -0800
To: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CD55FB1F.1D646%stearns@adobe.com>
On 2/28/13 11:35 PM, "Simon Sapin" <simon.sapin@exyr.org> wrote:

>Le 28/02/2013 23:34, Alan Stearns a écrit :
>> Section 4.1 notes that:
>>
>> ---
>> Since breaks are only allowed between siblings (1),
>> not between a box and its container,
>> a Œbreak-before¹ value on a first-child box
>> is propagated to its container.
>> Likewise a Œbreak-after¹ value on a last-child box
>> is propagated to its container.
>> ---
>>
>> First, the (1) isn't clear to me - I'm assuming it refers to the mention
>> of 'siblings' in the Class 1 definition above.
>
>I suggest changing the text to:
>
>"Since <a href=#btw-blocks>Class 1 breaks</a> are only allowed between
>siblings, […]"
>
>
>> Second, I think there should be one more sentence that notes that this
>> propagation stops at the fragmented flow boundary.
>
>Is the flow / flow boundary terminology that of css3-regions? (I need to
>read up on that.)

The 'fragmented flow' term is from css3-break. The notion of a flow
boundary isn't defined anywhere yet, I think.

>
>
>> If the first child of a
>> multicol element has break-before the break does not propagate to the
>> column or the multicol element.
>
>I suppose it depends on the type of break. A forced page break *should*
>propagate.

That's true. Section 4.3 talks about breaking through fragmentation
contexts, so perhaps that's the term to use. How about this sentence?

"This propagation stops before it breaks through the nearest matching
fragmentation context."

Thanks,

Alan

Received on Friday, 1 March 2013 14:36:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:21:06 GMT