- From: Øyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 19:05:06 +0100
- To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 09:19:38 +0100, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com> wrote: > Øyvind Stenhaug wrote: > > > > http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/first-page-selectors-003.htm > > > > Given that the root element has "page-break-before: left;", why would > the > > page with the <p> be matched by "@page:first"? > > > > "To explicitly force a document to begin printing on a left or right > page, > > authors can insert a page break before the first generated box." > > > > This doesn't say anything about :first, so I would assume that the > > document will simply "begin printing" on the second page. > > That's one valid interpretation. However, it will lead to many initial > blank pages. > > Another interpretation is that "begin printing" refers to the the > first page. If so, it may be better for the spec to say: > > "To explicitly force a document to begin printing on a left or right > page, > authors can insert a page break before the first page." > > I would favor a change; it's a small but important clarification, and > it would make the test case valid. I would prefer a separate sentence clarifying that the "old" first page is still first also "after" the page break (so to speak). Probably both in this section (13.2.2) and 13.3.4, since it matters to both the selector and the actual page count. Actually, the css3-page ED (but not the WD) seems to mostly cover what I'm looking for (except the "explicitly force" bit is in a section separated from the selectors stuff. Also, the "Forced page breaks" section only talks about the "multiple 'page-break-*' properties" case in the context of content-empty pages). -- Øyvind Stenhaug Core Norway, Opera Software ASA
Received on Thursday, 25 November 2010 18:03:51 UTC