- From: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 09:33:28 +0200
- To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?"G\=E9rard\?\= Talbot" <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
- Cc: "Public css-testsuite mailing list" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Also sprach "Gérard Talbot": > > However, it makes a lot of sense to also make widows/orphans apply in > > i multicol layouts -- even in non-paged media, no? Probably, the > > multicol spec should address this. > > orphans : "minimum number of lines in a block container that must be > left at the bottom of a page." That's the CSS 2.1 definition. CSS 2.1 dealt with pages, but not columns, so it's natural for it not to mention columns. Wikipedia, however, mentions columns along with pages: "In typesetting, widows and orphans are words or short lines at the beginning or end of a paragraph, which are left dangling at the top or bottom of a column" "Widow: A paragraph-ending line that falls at the beginning of the following page/column," "Orphan: A paragraph-opening line that appears by itself at the bottom of a page/column." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widows_and_orphans So, I'd argue that 'orphans' and 'widows' should apply to columns as well, and (a future version of) the specification should address this. Therefore, I don't think the tests should punish implementations who apply this. > So, how would (or could or should) this apply to the test in paged media > anyway? I am more tempted to remove 'orphans: 1' and 'widows: 1' than to > keep those. > > When I had the vendor-prefix and when in print preview, Chrome > 28.0.1500.71 fails the test regardless of the widows and orphans > declarations. > > If the test is supposed to be tested also in page media, then we should > create another test and then add the "paged" flag to such test. As is, > this test should be passed or failed in screen media. Whether the test > passes or fails in paged media really should be in another separate, > distinct test. Removing the explicit "screen" media type seems like an elegant solution to me. It makes tests simpler, and it means that page-centric implementations also can run the tests (both Prince and AntennaHouse have mature multicol implementations). Requiring a separate test for each media type would turn into a combinatorial explosion; there are many media types: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/media.html#media-types Do we really need to make a set of braille test cases and have two passing implementations in order for mulicol to go to PR? -h&kon Håkon Wium Lie CTO °þe®ª howcome@opera.com http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Thursday, 25 July 2013 07:34:09 UTC