RE: [css3-page]: Comments on pages media -- issues 40,

Your issue, shown below, has been rejected by the editor.  If you have any
further comment on this topic, you have 7 days, until 14 February 2004, to
respond.

> 1) Printable and non-printable areas
> 
> The size of the non-printable area is user agent defined. In
> some cases this will cause text to really stick to the edge 
> of the paper. It does in any case make the page layout less 
> portable.
> 
The non-printable area is that part of the paper that a printer cannot print
on.  In effect, it creates minimum margin that cannot be avoided. Since this
non-printable area varies from printer to printer it is the responsibility
of the printer to adjust the content. The specification says, "Printing
devices MUST adjust the layout of the document so that content is not lost.
How this adjustment is accomplished is device dependent within the
constraints expressed below in the sections Rendering page boxes that do not
fit a page sheet and Content outside the page box." 

Authors can attempt to isolate their documents from changes in the
non-printable area by using a margin large enough to leave their document
unaffected. 

> I think that the margin boxes should not be in the page
> margin. The margin boxes should be region boxes and what is 
> now the page-area should be the body region. The page-area 
> would then contain all the regions and the margins would be 
> around it.
> 

The net affect of you scheme seems to be the same as the current scheme of
margin boxes. Your scheme's page margin is the composite of the outer
margins of all the margin boxes in the current scheme. I admit it is tedious
to write declarations for all the margin boxes.  However, I don't think that
few page designs will use all of the margin boxes. Most page designs will
probably only use three or four margin boxes for things like page number,
date, document name, and author name.

The current scheme of margin boxes has a history and I have not heard an
alternate proposal yet with persuasive enough reasons to warrant a change.

 -- Jim Bigelow, editor

Received on Sunday, 8 February 2004 00:38:18 UTC