W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-houdini@w3.org > March 2015

RE: [fragment-tree] fragments should indicate whether they overflow

From: Rossen Atanassov <Rossen.Atanassov@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 06:16:19 +0000
To: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, "public-houdini@w3.org" <public-houdini@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BY2PR03MB192F7AA8FE6BF8435375F439B110@BY2PR03MB192.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Stearns [mailto:stearns@adobe.com]
> Sent: Sunday, February 8, 2015 7:07 PM
> One thing I forgot to mention during the meeting is that however we expose
> the boxes/fragments, they should indicate whether there’s any overflow
> present. A new layout system might need this to avoid causing overflow, and
> it would be a useful indicator of something to fix during measurement.
> I don’t know whether it would be better to only indicate overflow on the
> particular fragment with direct content that overflows, or if overflow should
> be indicated all the way up a fragment tree.
I agree that overflow is a core property of fragments. However, as we discussed this during the f2f a simple "overflow=true|false" won't do here. Fragmented overflow is structured, i.e. there could be any number of subfragments that are overflowing with or without continuation. The information that would be required between fragments must describe the set of fragments that are broken/overflow and how must layout was used in the previous fragment. In IE we call such information "fragment break record" and given such structure you can continue layout even without the presence of the previous fragments.

I wonder if we simply overlooked this part when we were discussing the fragment tree or did we agree to include it there?

Received on Tuesday, 3 March 2015 06:16:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:53:22 UTC