- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 16:27:45 -0700
- To: "David Woolley" <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>, <www-style@w3.org>
Hi, David, These sites are using three column layout: http://www.w3.org/ http://www.alistapart.com/ And this site does not as it is optimized for incremental rendering. http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/ Any layout which use columns (implemented in any way but not frames) is by HTML nature cannot be rendered incrementally. I mean "incremental rendering is completely frustrated" is not about tables only. There are already too many ways to break "incrementality" by using CSS. Why then be shy about margin-top:auto? Let it be a designer responsibility to decide what kind of optimization he/she need. There are a lot of sites which need to have finite x/y layout optimisation . There are plenty of others which follow classic HTML metaphor : unlimited tape of paper. CSS should serve both. In my own honest opinion. Andrew Fedoniouk. http://terrainformatica.com > > Most of sites are using sort of > > left-bar<|>content<|>right-bar layout these days. > > Many such sites are designed for page descriptions languages and ought > to be using them, rather than HTML. They often use table without > fixed layout, so don't render until I've given up waiting for them! > > > > > left-bar appear then content then right-bar... > > > > UA always knows when second step (vertical adjustment) is needed while > > loading document. > > You need to know the final vertical height of the content before anything > is rendered if you are to avoid a re-rendering artefacts. As noted above, > that is often achieved by auto-layout tables, but has the effect that > incremental rendering is completely frustrated. > > There are also applications in which infinite pages are generated dynamically. >
Received on Thursday, 13 May 2004 19:28:22 UTC