- From: Grant, Melinda <melinda.grant@hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 01:39:49 -0000
- To: <www-style@w3.org>
What is the intent wrt CSS 2.1 Section 13.3.3 Rules A-D regarding the relationship between an element whose 'page-break-inside' property value is 'avoid' and descendants whose values are 'auto'? Page-break-inside is inherited, so it's easy enough to set 'avoid' on a portion of a document tree. When a child within such a section is explicitly set to 'auto', a break opportunity is established between line boxes of the child. (Rule D) However, when two adjacent child blocks are set to auto, the break opportunity between them is overruled by the parent. (Rule B) This lack of parity seems undesirable. Either 'auto' should be allowed to override ancestors with 'avoid', or it should not. Am I missing some use case that would justify this difference in behavior between breaks between blocks versus breaks within blocks? I would suggest either: Removal of Rule B -- allow descendants to create a break opportunity when they are explicitly set to 'auto'. Or Modification of Rule D to constrain elements to not override their ancestors' 'page-break-inside: avoid' property. E.g., "Rule D: In addition, breaking at (2) is allowed only if the 'page-break-inside' <http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/page.html#propdef-page-break-inside> property is 'auto' for the element and all its ancestors." Or are there better ways to address this inconsistency? I think the question is, should an author be able to suspend 'page-break-inside: avoid' for some elements within such a block, or not? Best wishes, Melinda _____ HP - Melinda Grant Connectivity Standards Consumer Printing and Imaging +1 (541) 582-3681 melinda.grant@hp.com _____
Received on Friday, 16 March 2007 01:40:56 UTC