- From: Linss, Peter <peter.linss@hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 23:20:24 +0000
- To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- CC: Yuzo Fujishima <yuzo@google.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Feb 22, 2010, at 9:34 AM, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Yuzo Fujishima" <yuzo@google.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 1:55 AM
> To: <www-style@w3.org>
> Subject: [css3-page] Proposal: Making variable page area widths in a
> document optional
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> By using :left, :right, or :first pseudo-classes, it is currently possible
>> to make
>> left, right, or first pages have different page area widths.
>>
>> In the following example, right pages are 10cm narrower than left pages:
>> @page :left {margin-left: 3cm;margin-right: 4cm;}
>> @page :right {margin-left: 9cm;margin-right: 8cm;}
>>
>
> I do not think that it is even technically feasible to have a container with
> variable width in CSS.
> At least there is no definition of blocks having "jagged" sides as e.g. tall
> <table width=100%> spanning multiple pages.
>
> I believe that we should declare "behavior undefined" for variable page area
> boxes on different pages.
> Or at least "vendor specific" if some printer smart enough will be able to
> come up with the idea of how to render jagged tables with correct pagination
> in the future.
The CSS W/G discussed this back in November of 2008.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Nov/0024.html
"RESOLVED: Adopt proposal that page layout on current page assumes ICB
matches current page size and contents lay out accordingly,
restrict requirement to SHOULD and applying for non-BFC
elements in normal flow, all others being undefined"
Peter
Received on Monday, 22 February 2010 23:22:22 UTC