- From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 09:18:46 -0700
- To: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
- CC: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
On 9/26/11 5:41 PM, "Alex Mogilevsky" <alexmog@microsoft.com> wrote: > 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... If it does not matter all that much, then why invent a new rule? I think staggered content is always preferable to overlapping. I'm not entirely sure whether staggering continuations are preferable to overriding author intent by squeezing, but so far I haven't been convinced that the top-of-page continuation rule is useful enough to warrant a new layout algorithm. If the floats started in the narrower page we'd stagger them. That's a settled question. In most well-designed cases there will be space at the top of the page for continuations. In some layouts where where there are variable-width pages, and there are boxes that need continuing on a narrower page, and the box sizing has not taken the page size into account, there may be a problem. That sounds like an edge case to me, and could be solved in a readable way by staggering the boxes using the existing layout rules. How important is top-of-page in these instances? What's the problem we're solving, and is the solution worth the effort? Alan
Received on Tuesday, 27 September 2011 16:19:17 UTC