W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > July 2013

Re: [css3-multicol] Review of multicol-block-clip-001

From: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 00:17:42 +0200
Message-ID: <20977.41990.318150.885320@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?"G\=E9rard\?\= Talbot" <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
Cc: "Public css-testsuite mailing list" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Gérard Talbot wrote:

 > >   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widows_and_orphans
 > 
 > Text editors like MS-Word97, MS-Word2003, MS-Word2007, MS-Word2013,
 > LibreOffice (Writer) 3.x and 4.x also have orphan and widow as a
 > settable preference for paragraph.

Right. Like:

  p { widows: 1; orhphans: 1 }

 > > So, I'd argue that 'orphans' and 'widows' should apply to columns as
 > > well,
 > 
 > 'orphans' and 'widows' apply to block containers; and so it does to
 > multi-column too. But it only makes sense in paged media.

We may have to agree to disagree here. However, let me offer a
real-world example where I think orhphan/widow control is useful
beyond page media.
 
Wikipedia uses multicol layout for references. E.g. here:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets

Widow/orphan control are useful to ensure that a reference isn't split
across two columns.

 > > Therefore, I don't think the tests should punish implementations who
 > > apply this.
 > 
 > It would not punish any implementations if 'orphans: 1' and 'widows: 1'
 > were to be removed.

I thought a passing implementation stopped passing once you removed
these declarations?

 > > 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).
 > 
 > Okay. I'm going to keep 'widows: 1' and 'orphans: 1' as they are
 > declared in tests.
 > 
 > I would appreciate if you could explain what 'widows: 0' and 'orphans:
 > 0' is supposed to be doing in a bunch of tests then? Are those really
 > required by those tests? I don't think so...

You're right -- those declarations have illegal values and they should
be deleted.

-h&kon
              Håkon Wium Lie                          CTO °þe®ª
howcome@opera.com                  http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Thursday, 25 July 2013 22:18:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 20 January 2023 19:58:19 UTC