- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2010 13:32:52 -0800
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- CC: public-css-testsuite@w3.org
On 12/02/2010 10:47 PM, L. David Baron wrote: > I think this test: > http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/page-breaks-101.htm > is probably invalid. > > While the behavior it suggests seems desirable to me, I don't think > the behavior is what the spec says to do. As far as I can tell, the > rules in the "Allowed page breaks" section do not allow any breaks > after the P, only before it, since they only allow breaking in > margins that are *between* block boxes, not between the last child > block of a block and its parent block. The rules in that section > only allow ignoring a margin when it was broken across. Fixed. http://test.csswg.org/source/contributors/hp/submitted/css2.1/page/page-breaks-101.xht > As far as I can tell, the correct layout according to the spec is > probably to have two pages, with the P on the *second* page, and the > bottom border of the div overflowing past the bottom of the second > page and thus invisible. (I don't think that's a particularly > desirable result, though.) I agree that clipping the border might not be a desireable result, but I think forcing a page break at the paragraph instead of at the last margin before the border is intended. It pushes the last line of a bordered box to the next page so that you don't get stray borders floating around the next page. ~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 7 December 2010 21:33:33 UTC