RE: [css3-page] Rules for Pagination into Varying-Width Pages

I like the "top of page" rule. It would make no sense to me if clearance could be applied to part of a block.

I also agree that use cases with overlapping floats can only occur from bad design or misuse of content, so it doesn't matter all that much what the result is...

-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of Alan Stearns
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 5:03 PM
Cc: fantasai
Subject: Re: [css3-page] Rules for Pagination into Varying-Width Pages

On 9/19/11 10:14 AM, "fantasai" <> wrote:
>    * Continuations of boxes on a previous page must start at the top 
> of the page.
>      If this results in multiple shrinkwrapped floats side-by-side 
> that would otherwise
>      be staggered (if they were not continuations), the floats' widths 
> are reduced
>      in proportion to their original widths until they fit. However 
> they are not
>      reduced past their min-content width; this may result in overlap 
> between left and
>      right floats or side-by-side left floats overflowing the 
> containing block.

I agree with performing layout on a per-page basis, with the implications of boxes possibly changing widths across pages (or a region break).

But I'm not sure about the "top of page" rule. Is it more important to place a continuation at the top of a page than to honor its layout constraints?
I've attached a screenshot showing fixed-width left and right floats getting squeezed, overlapping or just staggering without the "top of page" rule. I'm not sure I see a big advantage to either of the first two if the fixed width was the author's intent.

Allowing continuations to use normal layout without a top-of-page rule seems easier to implement and easier to explain. I think in most intentional situations the continuations will naturally fit at the top of the page anyway. Can we leave out this rule?



Received on Tuesday, 27 September 2011 00:42:04 UTC