- From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 19:13:20 +1000
- To: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
- CC: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
On 28/09/2011 2:33 AM, David Hyatt wrote: > On Sep 27, 2011, at 11:18 AM, Alan Stearns wrote: > >> 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. > > I agree. I don't think we need this additional rule. It's not a clear benefit, so let's not complicate implementations with it. > > dave > (hyatt@apple.com) Would the float placeholder have to pulled from the flow and inserted later for a float to appear on a new page (which can overlap other floats). If not, I would suggest that it is the float placeholder that would have to be moved along with any static blocks or line boxes that come later in the source. I myself believe this would complicate things. -- Alan Gresley http://css-3d.org/ http://css-class.com/
Received on Wednesday, 28 September 2011 09:13:55 UTC